Court case 200.278.124/01 – 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.
A Dutch court ruled that Rabobank did not have to remove a couple's credit registration from a financial database. The court found that the bank's actions were legally required, showing that financial institutions can keep records even if individuals request their removal.
What happened
Rabobank refused to remove a couple's credit registration from the CKI register, and the court upheld this decision.
Who was affected
The couple who had their financial situation recorded in the CKI register by Rabobank.
What the authority found
The court ruled that Rabobank's registration of the couple's financial situation was legally required under the Financial Supervision Act, overriding their GDPR rights to erasure and objection.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that legal obligations can override GDPR rights in certain cases. Businesses should understand when they are required by law to keep records, even if individuals request their deletion.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
In 2011 Rabobank loaned 70K EUR to the appellants with a monthly payment of 700 EUR. At that time one of the appellants had a well-paid job, which he lost in 2013 and he hadn't been able to find another job after that. Financial problem followed, and the appellants ended up selling their house and taking an additional loan from their son to settle the debt payment scheme with the mortgage company and Rabobank. As a result of the above, Rabobank made a record about the appellants' situation in the CKI in 2018; the registration is schedules to be removed in 2023. In 2019 the appellants sent a letter to Rabobank requesting it to remove the registration, based on GDPR Articles 16 and 17 in combination with articles 21 and 6. Rabobank rejected the request and this decision was upheld by the Court. Appellants are challenging this decision of the Court. Should Rabobank remove the appellants' credit registrations from the CKI register? Regarding the legal basis of processing, the Court ruled that the applicable legal basis in this case is legal obligation under articles 4:32(1) and 4:34 of the Financial Supervision Act (Wet op het financieel toezicht). The Court pointed to the extensive considerations given to this matter by the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch in a similar case. This means that the appellants cannot exercise their rights to erasure (Article 17 GDPR) and objection to processing (Article 21 GDPR), so appeal based on these articles was dismissed. When deciding on the necessity and proportionality of keeping the CKI record, the Court considered the following: 1) The appellants themselves admitted that they were hindered by the registration, they were not in a distressing situation as a result of the registration; 2) One of the appellants has enjoyed good income for a long time, but that income did not protect him from a difficult financial situation; 3) The appellants have not sufficiently demonstrated that they have done everything in their power to
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 200.278.124/01 in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 200.278.124/01 - Netherlands (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: