Court case 200.286.170/01 NOT – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2021)
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 a candidate notary did not break any laws by including a home address in notarial deeds. The notary was following legal obligations and took steps to correct any issues. This decision shows that legal obligations can justify certain data uses under privacy laws.
What happened
The court found that including a home address in notarial deeds was legally justified.
Who was affected
The person whose home address was included in the notarial deeds.
What the authority found
The court ruled that the candidate notary acted within legal obligations, and there was no GDPR violation.
Why this matters
This ruling clarifies that legal obligations can justify data processing under privacy laws. It's important for professionals to understand when their legal duties allow for certain data uses.
National Law Articles
The plaintiff issued a complaint against a civil law candidate notary (the defendant) because her home address was stated in the draft of two notarial deeds. The complaint consisted of four parts: # The personal data became public for third parties because the personal data was included in the notary deeds; # the candidate notary checked the information in the Personal Records Database (Basisregistratie Personen) even though he was not authorized to do so; # the candidate notary did not dedicate enough care to correct this and limit the damage; # the candidate notary breached the GDPR. Did the candidate notary breach any laws or regulations by including a personal address in the notary deeds? The chamber held that: # the candidate notary was authorized to include the personal data in the deeds, based on Article 40(2)(c) of the Dutch Civil-law notaries act (Wet op het notarisambt) and Article 18(1)(3) of the Land registry act (Kadasterwet); # the candidate notary was obligated by law to check the identity of the parties and was allowed to use the Personal Record Database (Basisregistratie Personen) to do so; # the candidate notary took multiple actions to (duly) change the address data and limit any further damage; # the candidate notary processed the data based on a legal obligation, which is allowed by the GDPR "in many cases", and thus there was no violation. Further, the plaintiff did not provide any concrete arguments regarding which article of the GDPR was allegedly breached.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 200.286.170/01 NOT in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 200.286.170/01 NOT - Netherlands (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: