Court case 4 U 760/19 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2019)

Court Ruling
DPA LGGrlitz11 June 2019Germany
final
Court Ruling

General GDPR enforcement action

This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A German court ruled that a social network was right to delete a video containing offensive language and temporarily limit a user's account. The user claimed this caused him harm, but the court found no real damage. This case shows that not all discomforts online lead to compensation.

What happened

A social network deleted a video with offensive language and temporarily restricted a user's account.

Who was affected

A user who shared a video from the 1970s containing the word 'negro' on a social network.

What the authority found

The court decided that the video deletion and account restriction were lawful under the network's terms of use, and the user did not suffer any real harm.

Why this matters

This ruling clarifies that not every online inconvenience qualifies for compensation under data protection laws. It emphasizes the importance of terms of use in justifying content moderation actions.

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 82(1) GDPR
Decision AuthorityOLG Dresden
Reviewed AuthorityLG Görlitz (Germany)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

In that case, the Claimant brought an action against the deletion of a video from the 1970s that he shared in a social network where the word "negro" appeared several times. He also complained about having his account limited to "read only" mode for a few days (the exact duration is disputed between the parties). With regard to Article 99(2) GDPR, the Court already expressed doubts as to whether Article 82 GDPR is applicable to the deletion/blocking that took place in March/April 2018, as this regarded a past and completed situation. However, this point could be left open as for the Court, the video deletion and temporary account blocking was lawful under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR in connection with the terms of use of the network. In any event, the Claimant did not suffer any non-material damages pursuant to Artcile 82(1) GDPR. Not every perceived discomfort without serious impairment of an individual's self-image or reputation may constitute such damage. Recital 146 to the GDPR, referring to "full and effective compensation", does not alter this finding. Otherwise, an almost "unconditional" right to non-material compensation would arise under data protection law.

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 4 U 760/19 in DE

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Ruling Date

11 June 2019

Authority

DPA LGGrlitz

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 4 U 760/19 - Germany (2019). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: