Court case 0856/20.0BELRA – Court Ruling (Portugal, 2021)

Court Ruling
DPA AdministrativeCourto17 February 2021Portugal
final
Court Ruling

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 Portuguese court ruled that the Tax Office was right to refuse a request for a neighbor's tax number, saying it is protected personal data. This decision highlights the importance of privacy even for information some might think should be public.

What happened

The Portuguese Tax Office refused to provide a citizen with a neighbor's National Tax Number (NIF), citing privacy laws.

Who was affected

A citizen who wanted the tax number to verify property boundaries was affected by the refusal.

What the authority found

The court decided that the tax number is personal data and not publicly available, aligning with stricter privacy protections.

Why this matters

This case emphasizes that even seemingly public information like tax numbers is protected under privacy laws. Small businesses and individuals should be cautious about assuming certain data can be freely accessed.

GDPR Articles Cited

National Law Articles

art. 5, art. 6.5 b) and art. 9 of Act 26/2016
art. 2 and art. 37 of Decree-Law 14/2013
art. 64 of the Portuguese General Tax Law (Decree-Law 398/98)
art. 268.2 of the Portuguese Constitution
Decision AuthoritySTA
Reviewed AuthorityAdministrative Court of Leiria (Portugal)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

A citizen requested that the Tax Office provided her/him with the National Tax Number (NIF) of the owner of a neighbouring building and land, so as to request a check on the exact boundaries of the lands owned by both. The Tax Office, alleging Article 68 of the National Tax Law and the Data Protection Act, refused the request. The petitioner considered that the NIF of the owner of a building does not fall under the definition of what constitutes data that is protected by tax secrecy, as such data should be publicly available. Does the tax number of the owner of a building constitute personal data or data that should be publicly available? The appeal concerns the decision of the Administrative Court of Leiria, which dismissed the request for information made to the Portuguese Tax Office to provide the Portuguese National Tax Number (NIF) of an alleged neighbour, in order to contact this third party for purposes of checking the boundaries of an allegedly adjacent land. Before, it had been solidly anchored in the Portuguese jurisprudence a flexible approach to the duty of confidentiality and the protection of taxpayer data, with the Courts generally accepting that the NIF was not part of the sphere of intimacy in private life, and so, not personal data, but considered as publicly available data on taxpayers. In fact, it was the general understanding that publicly available personal data could be revealed, which encompassed public data or personal data contained in an official public document, as is the case, for example, with the NIF, as well as fiscal data that does not reflect or denounce the tax status of taxpayers. However, with Decree-Law no. 14/2013, of 28 January, the legislator started to adopt a much more rigid position regarding this information, with the new Law reflecting an increasing concern with the protection and treatment of individual data. This Decree modified the Portuguese General Tax Law (Lei Geral Tributária, or LGT) and added a new excepti

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 0856/20.0BELRA in PT

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

Details

Ruling Date

17 February 2021

Authority

DPA AdministrativeCourto

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 0856/20.0BELRA - Portugal (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: