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

Court case 11 LA 104/19 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2020)

Court Ruling
DPA VGOsnabrck22 July 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 German court ruled that a government authority unlawfully sent personal data by fax without proper security measures. This decision highlights the importance of protecting personal information, even when sharing it with authorized representatives. It serves as a reminder for companies to ensure secure communication methods for sensitive data.

What happened

The court found that the authority unlawfully transmitted personal data by fax without encryption.

Who was affected

The company owner whose personal data was included in the faxed decision.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the authority failed to comply with data protection regulations by not ensuring secure transmission of personal data.

Why this matters

This ruling emphasizes the need for organizations to implement secure communication practices to protect personal data. Companies should review their data transmission methods to avoid similar violations.

National Law Articles
AI-identified
Article 1 (1) GG - Grundgesetz (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany)
§ 41(2) of the Straßenverkehrsgesetz - StVG (Law on Road Traffic)
§ 7 des Niedersächsischen Datenschutzgesetzes a.F.- NDSG a.F. (Data Protection Act of Lower Saxonia in the old version)
Article 2 (1) GG
Decision AuthorityOVG Lüneburg
Reviewed AuthorityVG Osnabrück (Germany)

Source checks

Secondary-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 20 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified, 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 applicant is the owner of a company [handling prohibited substances] and of two vehicles for which the defendant ordered transmission blocks in accordance with § 41(2) of the Straßenverkehrsgesetz - StVG (Law on Road Traffic) - in the register of vehicles. With regard to restrictions in those orders, the plaintiff brought proceedings before the Verwaltungsgericht (Administrative Court). The defendant confirmed that it complies with the current data protection regulations and does not carry out an unencrypted transmission of his personal data by electronic means. In the context of the proceedings, the defendant sent to its lawyer, by fax the decision ordering the blocking of transmission of the applicant's vehicle. That decision contains, inter alia, the name and address of the applicant, the vehicle identification number and the registration number of the vehicle. The notice was sent unencrypted without anonymisation of the personal data. It is disputed 1) Whether the transmission by the authority by fax of a decision containing personal data was unlawful 2) Whether personal data are transmitted by fax, the authority must take precautionary measures to guarantee the fundamental right to informational self-determination of the person concerned and which level of protection needs to be complied with. The court held that the transmission by the authority by fax of a decision containing personal data was unlawful. The level of protection needs to be complied with depends on the sensitivity and importance of the data to be transmitted, the potential risks involved in fax transmission, the degree to which the data subject is in need of protection and the effort required for the security measures. It is also irrelevant that the decision was not sent by fax to any third party but to the defendant's representative, who, like his employees, is subject to the obligation of confidentiality. There is a risk of abuse by unauthorised third parties, which may occur at any time.

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 11 LA 104/19 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

22 July 2020

Authority

DPA VGOsnabrck

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 11 LA 104/19 - Germany (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: