Stichting Jeugdbescherming regio Amstedam – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2020)

A minor has been placed under supervision of the Amsterdam Centre for Youth and Family (Stichting Jeugdbescherming regio Amsterdam; the defendant). The mother (plaintiff) requests a copy of the complete file from the defendant containing her personal data. The defendant provides the requested data, but removes some phrases and didn’t provide internal notes. Are internal notes and correspondence containing personal data subject to article 15 GDPR? The court ruled that the plaintiff did not provide enough indications to contradict the statement of the defendant that the removed phrases did not contain personal data. The request to provide the removed phrases is denied. The court rules that the internal notes and correspondence must be qualified as personal thoughts from employees which are only intended for internal consultation and deliberation and therefore can’t be qualified as personal data in the sense of the GDPR. Besides, the purpose of the request is not consistent with the purpose of Article 15 GDPR. The request was made in relation to a family dispute, while the purpose of Article 15 GDPR is to enable data subjects to verify whether their personal data is correct and to verify whether their personal data is processed lawfully. The request is denied.