- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 8 C 130/18 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2018)
Privacy enforcement record
This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
A court ruled that a person could not claim damages for receiving a spam email because the harm was considered too minimal. This decision is important because it clarifies that not every violation of privacy laws leads to compensation. It shows that courts require actual harm to justify damages.
What happened
A person sought €500 in damages after receiving a spam email but was awarded only €50.
Who was affected
The individual who received the spam email and claimed damages.
What the authority found
The court decided that minimal damages do not qualify for compensation under GDPR, as there was no significant harm.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that individuals must demonstrate real harm to receive damages for privacy violations. Small business owners should ensure they have clear policies to avoid spam complaints.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 23 March 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, authority corrected.
Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources
A person received a spam email and asked from the sender a total amount of damages of EUR 500; the defendant acknowledged the claim in the amount of EUR 50 and the claimant still pursued the claim for an additional amount of at least EUR 500 of immaterial damages. The defendant contested the claim and asked the court to dismiss the claim. The defendant argued that the claimant had not suffered anything more than "minimal" damages. The court held that the infringement of GDPR as such without damages as a consequence thereof will not give rise to a claim for damages and that "minimal damages" do not give raise to damages under Article 82 GDPR. The decision is based on German literature on the GDPR.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 8 C 130/18 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Ruling Date
7 November 2018
Authority
DPA AGDiez
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 8 C 130/18 - Germany (2018). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: