Enforcing jurisdiction
Austria · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
Privacy topics

DSB – Court Ruling (Austria, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA BVwG3 February 2022Austria
final
Court Ruling

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.

An Austrian court ruled on a case involving a municipality's water supply system that monitored a resident's water usage. The court found that the municipality's actions did not violate the GDPR, as the data was necessary for legal compliance. This decision highlights the balance between data protection and public service obligations.

What happened

The court ruled that the municipality's monitoring of a resident's water usage did not breach data protection laws.

Who was affected

A resident whose water consumption was monitored by the municipality due to past excessive usage.

What the authority found

The court concluded that the municipality's data collection was justified for legal compliance and did not violate the GDPR.

Why this matters

This ruling illustrates how public service needs can intersect with data protection laws, emphasizing the importance of lawful data processing in public utilities.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 17 GDPR
Art. 18 GDPR
Art. 21 GDPR
Art. 22 GDPR
Art. 4(1) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(1) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 17(GDPR)
Art. 18(GDPR)
Art. 21(GDPR)
Art. 22(GDPR)

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

Decision AuthorityBVwG

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 21 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, 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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The controller is a municipality. The data subject owns property in the controller’s district. The data subject won a lawsuit against the controller, obliging it to connect the data subject’s property to the municipal drinking water supply. The judgement was limited to the supply needed for a single-family home. The controller complied with the judgement and connected the data subject’s property to its water supply system. It also installed an analogous water meter (not a smart meter) at the beginning of the water pipe to measure the consumption of the data subject’s property. The water meter is checked once a year by the municipality. The results are stored in the municipality’s software application which is hosted in an Austrian datacenter. The data is retained for thirty years to exercise or defend against possible legal claims. Moreover, because multiple times in the past the data subject used vast amounts of water, exceeding the need of a single-family home by far, the municipality installed a system that measured the daily consumption of the data subject. At the beginning, the system worked as follows: An incremental encoder was installed on top of the water meter. This incremental encoder sent digital signals to a programmable logic controller (PLC) at the water supply facility of the controller every time water was used by the data subject. The programmable logic controller counted the signals and if the usage of the data subject exceeded the threshold of 950 liters per day, the PLC closed the solenoid valve of the pipe, cutting of the water supply to the data subject's property. The counter was automatically reset each day to zero. After five months the controller switched to a system where the water supply was not automatically shut off by the PLC but an employee was notified to check whether the alarm was accurate and, if yes, to shut off the water supply manually. After the data subject learned about this conduct of the controller, she asked the contro

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Details

Ruling Date

3 February 2022

Authority

DPA BVwG

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. DSB - Austria (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: