Executive board of the municipality of Haarlem – 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 ordered the municipality of Haarlem to pay a penalty to a person after it delayed responding to his data access request. The municipality argued that the person was abusing his rights to get money, but the court found the appeal valid. This case shows the importance of timely responses to data requests.
What happened
The municipality of Haarlem delayed responding to a data access request, leading to a court-ordered penalty.
Who was affected
The person who submitted a data access request to the municipality of Haarlem.
What the authority found
The court ruled that the municipality's delay in responding justified the penalty, despite claims of abuse of rights.
Why this matters
This case underscores the necessity for public bodies and businesses to respond promptly to data access requests to avoid penalties. It also clarifies that claims of procedural abuse require solid evidence.
GDPR Articles Cited
Complainant has submitted a data subject access request to the executive board of the municipality of Haarlem on 24th of July 2019. On 26th of October 2019 complainant lodged an appeal in connection with a failure to take action on his request. On 20th of December 2019 the municipality made a decision on the request. On 7th of February 2020 the District Court of the Northern Netherlands declared the appeal well founded and ordered the municipality to pay a penalty of EUR 1 442 to the complainant and cover the court fee of EUR 174. The municipality has opposed to this judgement. The Court must decide whether the appeal of the complainant can be considered well-founded without a reasonable doubt. The municipality is of the opinion that the judgement of the 7th of February 2020 did not take into account the argument that the claimant was abusing his rights in order to get paid for the delayed decision on the right of access. Complainant completely ignored requests to provide additional information necessary to action the access request, such as a request for a copy of an ID. Furthermore, the complainant's letter sent to the municipality on 24th of August 2019 cannot be viewed as a penalty payment notice under Article 6:2 of the Dutch Administrative Law Act because the content of that letter doesn't make it clear what request it refers to, the municipality is not requested to make a decision within a certain period of time and the letter does not clearly state that a penalty payment will be required in the absence of such decision. The claimant is of the opinion that there was no abuse of rights; the letter constitutes a valid penalty payment notice of because the municipality hasn't disputed its validity in the previous proceedings and because penalty payment notices were allowed to be submitted in free form. The Court established that the parties were not disputing the fact that the decision on the complainant's access request under GDPR should have been take
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Executive board of the municipality of Haarlem in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Executive board of the municipality of Haarlem - Netherlands (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: