- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 1 W 18/21 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2021)
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 person tried to get compensation for damage caused by a company but was denied. The court said they didn't show enough proof of any harm. This case highlights the need for clear evidence when seeking damages under data protection laws.
What happened
A person applied for legal aid to claim compensation for alleged unlawful data processing by a company.
Who was affected
The individual who sought compensation for immaterial damage from the company.
What the authority found
The Bremen Higher Regional Court ruled that the person did not provide sufficient evidence of damage, which is necessary for a compensation claim under GDPR.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that simply claiming a violation is not enough for compensation. It serves as a reminder for individuals to gather solid evidence when pursuing claims related to data protection.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 21 March 2026.
Processing notes: 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
The data subject wanted to assert a claim for compensation for immaterial damage against the controller. To this end, the data subject first applied for legal aid. For this purpose, the data subject set out the unlawfulness of a data processing - not described in the decision. Nothing was said about a non-material damage. For this reason, the Regional Court of Bremen dismissed the application. The data subject filed an immediate appeal against this decision. The Bremen Higher Regional Court (OLG Bremen) rejected the application. The requirements for a claim for damages were not fully presented. Article 82 GDPR presupposes damage. The asserted mere breach of the provisions of the GDPR is not sufficient for a claim. Furthermore, the court found that there was no need to refer the case to the ECJ. First, the wording of Article 82 GDPR clearly presupposes a damage. In this respect, the decision differed from the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of 14 January 2021 (BVerfG - 1 BvR 2853/19). In that decision, the issue was not whether any damage had occurred at all, but whether there was a materiality threshold for this claim. Second, there is no obligation to make a reference under Article 267(3) TFEU for the proceedings here, since a decision on a legal aid application does not bind the court in the subsequent main action. In this respect, the parties are free to have the issue, which was originally decided only provisionally, re-examined by the courts.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 1 W 18/21 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 1 W 18/21 - Germany (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: