- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Belgium · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 2020/813/A – Court Ruling (Belgium, 2020)
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 GRAYDON could not automatically consider the processing of personal data unlawful just because of a misidentification. This matters because it clarifies that companies can still process data based on legitimate interests.
What happened
The court found that GRAYDON's processing of personal data related to a misidentified person was not automatically unlawful.
Who was affected
Mrs. KAHN, who was wrongly associated with the EGAR company.
What the authority found
The court decided that GRAYDON could process data based on legitimate interests, despite the misidentification.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights that businesses can have valid reasons for processing personal data, even if there are mistakes, as long as they can demonstrate a legitimate interest.
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 — 19 March 2026.
Processing notes: 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
GRAYDON wrongly associated Mrs. KAHN’s name with the EGAR company. Consequently, on 31 July 2019, Mrs. KAHN was requested by a bailiff to pay the amount of 537.02 euros on behalf of EGAR as part of the mandatory annual contribution. Mrs. KAHN claimed the existence of a misidentification and challenged the lawfulness of the processing of her personal data. She requested the deletion of all her personal data appearing in GRAYDON’s file. Does a misidentification of a data subject in connection with a specific company in a register and a request for deletion arising from this data subject necessarily imply that any processing of his/her personal data in this register is unlawful under article 6 GDPR? The Tribunal declared the action admissible and observed that GRAYDON spontaneously deleted Mrs. KAHN's personal data in connection with EGAR. However, the Tribunal stated that the processing of her personal data by GRAYDON in relation to other legal persons is not automatically unlawful. Despite the withdrawal of consent by Mrs. KAHN, GRAYDON may base the processing of personal data on a legitimate interest (Article 6(1) 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 2020/813/A in BE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 2020/813/A - Belgium (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: