Veilig Thuis – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA RbZeeland-West-Braba13 January 2022Netherlands
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.

The Dutch court ruled that Veilig Thuis did not have to delete or change records about a child involved in a truancy case. The child's mother wanted the records erased or corrected, but the court found that keeping the records was in the child's best interest. This case shows that child protection concerns can outweigh privacy requests.

What happened

Veilig Thuis refused to delete or amend records about a child's truancy, despite the mother's request.

Who was affected

A child and their mother, who wanted records about the child's truancy erased or corrected.

What the authority found

The court ruled that Veilig Thuis was justified in keeping the records due to the child's safety and welfare concerns.

Why this matters

This decision highlights that child safety can take precedence over privacy rights in certain situations. It emphasizes the need for organizations to balance privacy requests with broader welfare considerations.

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 16 GDPR
Art. 17 GDPR
Art. 79 GDPR
Art. 17(3)(b) GDPR
Art. 17(3)(c) GDPR

National Law Articles

Article 5.3.5 Wmo
Decision AuthorityGHSHE
Reviewed AuthorityRb. Zeeland-West-Brabant (Netherlands)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

Controller is Stichting Veilig Thuis, a public organisation that deals with cases or suspicions of (suspected) domestic violence or child abuse. The data subject is a 11-year-old child that had been missing school several times. After Veilig Thuis received reports from the data subject’s school regarding truancy, it sent the mother an email, in which it stated (among other things) that “Veilig Thuis has made the agreement with the obligatory education officer that she will contact Veilig Thuis if the safety of the child is jeopardised again or continues to be so (e.g. when you do not accept the help that is offered)”. The mother did not agree with the wording and requested to rectify the dossier, pursuant to Article 16 GDPR, by removing the word “again”. Moreover, she requested to have the whole dossier erased, pursuant to Article 17 GDPR. Veilig Thuis rejected both requests, which led the mother to [https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2021:1970&showbutton=true&keyword=C%2f02%2f381362+%2f+HA+RK+21-16 bring the matter before court]. The District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, however, rejected the appeal. Regarding the deletion request, it decided that it cannot be assumed that the interests of the child’s legal representative (the mother) and the child will always coincide. Moreover, it noted that Veilig Thuis had been involved with the family for some time, had concerns about the child’s school negligence. Thus, it found that Veilig Thuis had a reasonable chance to judge that the substantial interest of the child required that Veilig Thuis saved the data, and that this substantial interest of saving the data outweighed the interest of the mother to erase the data. Regarding the rectification request, the Court considered that the right to rectification is not meant to correct or remove impressions, opinions, research results and conclusions with which the person concerned does not agree. The District Court, however, did not order the

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Veilig Thuis in NL

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

Details

Ruling Date

13 January 2022

Authority

DPA RbZeeland-West-Braba

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Veilig Thuis - Netherlands (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: