Enforcing jurisdiction
Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
No confirmed legal basis recorded.
Privacy topics

Court case 18 U 5493/19 Pre – Court Ruling (Germany, 2020)

Court Ruling
DPA LGIngolstadt8 December 2020Germany
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 court in Germany ruled that Facebook can require users to use their real names on their platform. This matters because it shows that social media companies can enforce rules to prevent fake accounts, which helps keep the platform safer for everyone.

What happened

Facebook blocked a user's account for not changing her pseudonym to a real name.

Who was affected

The user who created her Facebook account under a pseudonym and had it blocked.

What the authority found

The court decided that Facebook is allowed to require users to use their real names to prevent misuse.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights that social media platforms can enforce real-name policies. Other platforms may need to consider their own identity verification practices.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 99(2) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 99(2) GDPR

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

National Law Articles
AI-identified
§ 307 (1) BGB
§ 307 (2) BGB
§ 307 (3) BGB
§ 3 (2) TMG
§ 13 (4) TMG
Decision AuthorityOLG München
Reviewed AuthorityLG Ingolstadt (Germany)

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 18 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, 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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The plaintiff's was a user account on the Facebook platform. She created her user account under a pseudonym. Facebook blocked her user account after the plaintiff had not complied with the defendant's request to change her profile name for a clear name. The plaintiff asserted claims against the defendant for the activation of her user account created under the pseudonym, as well as claims for damages and pre-judicial lawyer's fees. The Regional Court in Ingolstadt granted the action only with regard to the activation of the plaintiff's user account plus pro rata pre-judicial lawyer's fees and otherwise dismissed the action. Both parties filed an appeal against this judgement. Was it legitimate for the operator of the social network platform to ask for the user's clear name? On appeal by the defendant, the Higher Regional Court amended the final judgment of the Regional Court of Ingolstadt of 13 September 2019, Case No. 31 O 227/18, to the effect that the action was dismissed in its entirety. The Higher Regional Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal. The Higher Regional Court in Munich held that the operator of a social network is entitled, in order to prevent unlawful conduct by its users, to require the use of clear names and to block the user account in the event of violations of this obligation.

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 18 U 5493/19 Pre in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

8 December 2020

Authority

DPA LGIngolstadt

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 18 U 5493/19 Pre - Germany (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: