Manfield Schoenen B.V. – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2019)
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 Dutch court ruled that Manfield Schoenen B.V. could not use fingerprint scanners for employee authentication without proving it was necessary. This decision is important because it emphasizes the need for companies to justify the use of sensitive data like fingerprints.
What happened
Manfield Schoenen B.V. used fingerprint scanners for employee authentication without proving necessity.
Who was affected
Employees of Manfield Schoenen B.V. who were required to use fingerprint scanners at work.
What the authority found
The court decided that Manfield could not process fingerprints for security without demonstrating necessity and proportionality.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the strict conditions under which biometric data can be used, reminding businesses to carefully evaluate their data processing practices, especially when involving sensitive information.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
Mansfield introduced an obligatory employee fingerprint scanner on cash registers in its stores. One of the employees objected to the use of this technology based on [Article 9 GDPR] and Article 29 of the Dutch GDPR Implementation Act (“UAVG”). The store employee did not agree that the processing of the fingerprint was necessary for the authentication and security purposes. The parties asked the Court to clarify whether the use of fingerprint scanner in this case violated the right to privacy of the store sales assistant. The judge found that a fingerprint constituted indeed personal data (same authorisation system was also used for time registration purposes, which means there was a clear link between the fingerprint and a person) and that Manfield was not allowed to process fingerprints to enhance its security and fraud prevention measures. It also found that Article 29 of the Dutch GDPR Implementation Act was not applicable in this case because Manfield could not demonstrate necessity and proportionality of this processing.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Manfield Schoenen B.V. in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Manfield Schoenen B.V. - Netherlands (2019). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: