Court case 410d C 197/20 – Court Ruling (Germany, 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 German court ruled that Beratungsflat could not email a lawyer for advertising without consent. The lawyer's website clearly stated they did not want unsolicited emails. This case highlights the importance of respecting privacy notices on websites.
What happened
Beratungsflat emailed a lawyer with an advertising offer despite the lawyer's website stating they did not want unsolicited emails.
Who was affected
The lawyer who received the unsolicited advertising email from Beratungsflat.
What the authority found
The court decided that Beratungsflat violated the lawyer's privacy by sending an unsolicited email, ignoring the clear notice on the lawyer's website.
Why this matters
This case underscores the need for businesses to respect explicit privacy notices on websites. Companies should ensure they have clear consent before sending advertising emails.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
The data subject is a lawyer and the controller is a website named Beratungsflat. The lawyer received an email from Beratungsflat and the email said that Beratungsflat offered legal advice by lawyers by telephone via its website, www.beratungsflat.de. The email also stated that Beratungsflat cooperated with lawyers, and they were remunerated by it for this telephonic advice. At the end of the e-mail, Beratungsflat asked whether the lawyer would be interested in offering legal advice by telephone via Beratungsflat's website and invited them to contact Beratungsflat if they were interested. Beratungsflat had obtained the email address of the lawyer from the contact page of their law-firm's website. The contact page of the law firm's website also contained a marked notice that the processing or use of data for purposes of advertising or market or opinion research by any means of communication is objected to and that no advertising mailings or calls are desired. In normal text, the law firm's website further stated that the use of contact data published in the imprint or comparable information, including e-mail addresses, by third parties for the purpose of sending information not expressly requested is not permitted, and legal action is reserved. On the day the email in question was received, the lawyer sent a cease and desist notice to Beratungsflat and claimed damages of €500. Subsequently, Beratungsflat refused to issue the cease-and-desist declaration and to make the payment. Accordingly, the lawyer approached the Local Court Hamburg-Bergedorf seeking a direction prohibiting Beratungsflat from contacting and/or having contact made with them by email for advertising purposes without their express consent, on pain of an orderly fine of up to €250,000 for each case of culpable infringement, or alternatively up to six months' imprisonment, with the orderly imprisonment to be carried out for the Beratungsflat on the Beratungsflat's managing directors. The lawyer also s
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 410d C 197/20 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 410d C 197/20 - Germany (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: