Publications Arctinos Ltd – Court Ruling (Cyprus, 2022)
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 Cypriot court overturned a fine against a newspaper for publishing police officers' names and photos, ruling that the newspaper wasn't given a fair chance to respond to the complaint. The court emphasized the importance of the right to be heard in administrative decisions. This case underscores the need for authorities to ensure fair procedures when handling complaints.
What happened
A newspaper was fined for publishing police officers' details, but the fine was overturned due to procedural unfairness.
Who was affected
The newspaper that published the names and photos of police officers involved in an alleged harassment case.
What the authority found
The court annulled the fine, stating that the newspaper's right to be heard was violated, as it wasn't properly informed of the complaint details.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the critical importance of procedural fairness in administrative actions. It serves as a reminder for authorities to ensure that entities have a fair chance to respond to complaints, reinforcing the principles of transparency and due process.
National Law Articles
The controller is a newspaper. It published an article about the alleged harassment, unnecessary and illegal detention of a Turkish Cypriot woman who was on the Police Alert-List. The article revealed the names and photographs of the two police officers carrying out these actions. These officers then lodged a complaint with the DPA of Cyprus (Commissioner). Following the receipt of the complaint, the Commissioner informed the newspaper that the publication would violate the principle of data minimisation as well as Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. However, in doing so, the Commissioner did not disclose the existence of the complaint itself. The controller did not respond to this communication from the Commissioner, who in turn contacted the newspaper again, setting a four week deadline for an answer. This time the commissioner disclosed the existence of the complaint and the complainants, without however providing the controller with a copy of the complaint. The controller's lawyer responded, stating that the first letter was inadvertently not answered, and further stated that their client had no possibility to contest the complaint because it is not aware of its content. A few days later the Commissioner imposed a fine on the controller without further notice. The controller appealed this decision with the competent Administrative Court. The Administrative Court annulled this decision on the grounds that the conduct of the Commissioner violated the right to be heard. The court referred to Article 43(1),(2) Law N. 158 (I)/1999, which is the Cypriot Law on General Principles of Administrative Law. Article 43(1) Law N. 158 (I)/1999 stipulates that everyone who is affected by an administrative measure must have the right to be heard, except in cases expressly provided by law. Article 43(2) Law N. 158 (I)/1999 stipulates that an administrative body which intends to base its decision on allegations against a person must provide that person with the opportunity to submit its
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Publications Arctinos Ltd in CY
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Publications Arctinos Ltd - Cyprus (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: