Royal Schiphol Group N.V. – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2020)
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.
Royal Schiphol Group used a midwife's picture in an ad without her consent, leading to a legal dispute. The court found that Schiphol violated her privacy rights by displaying her image, even after being asked to stop. This case shows the importance of obtaining clear consent before using someone's image in advertising.
What happened
Schiphol used a midwife's picture in an advertisement without her consent, violating her privacy rights.
Who was affected
The affected person was a midwife whose picture was used in an advertisement at Schiphol Airport.
What the authority found
The court ruled that Schiphol violated the midwife's privacy by using her image without her consent, even after being informed to stop.
Why this matters
This case underscores the importance of obtaining explicit consent before using personal images in advertising. It highlights the legal risks of ignoring requests to cease using someone's likeness.
GDPR Articles Cited
The Foundation is an organisation that does health care work on an unnamed continent. Claimant is a professional midwife in an undisclosed country; she followed a three-year training as a midwife with the support of the Foundation. In 2016, Schiphol and the Foundation signed a sponsorship deal, which, among others, allowed the Foundation to place its advertising in the terminals of Schiphol. Foundation shared the ad creatives with Schiphol, who then stored them on its servers and displayed them on the billboards. Picture of the claimant was used for one of those ad creatives and it has been displayed on one of the screens in Schiphol for approximately a year before the claimant informed the Foundation that she didn’t want them to use her portrait for the advertising in Schiphol. Claimant and the Foundation reached a agreement and the Foundation subsequently informed Schiphol that the picture in question could not be used anymore. Schiphol removed the portrait from its billboards. However, some time after this, Schiphol published an article on Platform dedicated to marketing, media and communications for professionals in this area. The article was about the sponsorship agreement between Schiphol and the Foundation and it included the picture of the claimant. On 29th of January the Foundation informed Schiphol that the picture should not have been used. Schiphol immediately requested the Platform to delete the picture and replace it with another picture. The article with the claimant’s picture was seen approximately 73 times and was also shared via Twitter. On 8 May 2019 the claimant’s lawyer wrote to Schiphol requesting a conversation about a compensation from Schiphol to claimant. The parties did not reach an agreement. Schiphol offered claimant a € 1500 compensation twice, claimant rejected the offer. According to the claimant, Schiphol has violated her portrait rights and her right to privacy by publishing her picture and other personal data visible on the pi
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Royal Schiphol Group N.V. in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Royal Schiphol Group N.V. - Netherlands (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: