Enforcing jurisdiction
Netherlands · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
Privacy topics

Court case AWB - 19 _ 1687 – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2020)

Court Ruling
DPA RbMidden-Nederland29 May 2020Netherlands
final
Court Ruling

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 Dutch court ruled that a company must do more than just issue a new report to correct inaccuracies in a person's medical records. This matters because it emphasizes that companies need to take real steps to fix mistakes in personal data, not just add new documents.

What happened

The court decided that a company failed to properly rectify inaccuracies in a person's medical reports.

Who was affected

The person whose medical situation was inaccurately reported and who sought corrections.

What the authority found

The court found that simply issuing a new report was not enough to meet the legal requirement for correcting personal data inaccuracies.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the importance of thorough data correction processes for companies. It sets a precedent that companies must actively ensure their data practices comply with legal standards.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 16 GDPR
Art. 24 GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 16(GDPR)
Art. 24(GDPR)

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

Decision AuthorityRb. Midden-Nederland

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 19 March 2026.

No issues were reported by that automated check.

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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The plaintiff complained about factual inaccuracies in reports on his medical situation and possibilities for performing work in the context of granting a work benefit. He requested rectification of data in these reports. The defendant claimed it corrected the inaccuracies by issuing a new report but the plaintiff found this not sufficient since the inaccuracies remain in the initial reports and alleged violation of his right to rectification. The Court had to assess the way in which the rectification should be carried out by the defendant considering also its technical capacity. The District Court invoked Article 24 and Recital 78 GDPR and concluded that data controllers must take appropriate technical and organisational measures that are necessary to ensure that the requirements of GDPR are met. It found that an additional report cannot be considered sufficient to fulfill the right to rectification. The controller must use its best efforts to ensure that policies and systems are in line with the GDPR including transparent and clearly recognisable rectification of inaccuracies other than merely adding a document in a medical file. The Court ordered the controller to investigate the possibilities of complying with the right to rectification within six weeks and notify the Court if it will make use of this opportunity within two weeks.

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case AWB - 19 _ 1687 in NL

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

Details

Ruling Date

29 May 2020

Authority

DPA RbMidden-Nederland

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case AWB - 19 _ 1687 - Netherlands (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: