Court case 8 U 2907/21 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA LGAnsbach14 March 2022Germany
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.

A German court ruled that a health insurance customer's request for information was abusive. The customer wanted details about premium changes, but the court found the request wasn't about checking data processing legality. This decision shows that not all information requests under GDPR are valid.

What happened

A court ruled that a health insurance customer's request for information on premium changes was abusive.

Who was affected

A health insurance customer who requested information about premium adjustments from their insurer.

What the authority found

The court decided the request was abusive because it wasn't aimed at verifying the legality of data processing, as required by GDPR.

Why this matters

This ruling clarifies that GDPR requests must be genuine and related to data processing legality. Businesses should evaluate the intent behind information requests to determine their validity.

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 12(5)(b) GDPR
Art. 15(1) GDPR
Decision AuthorityOLG Nürnberg
Reviewed AuthorityLG Ansbach (Germany)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The controller is a private health insurance company. The data subject is insured with the controller. The parties are in dispute about the invalidity of several premium increases as well as about the resulting claims for refunds. The data subject filed a lawsuit with the Regional Court of Ansbach (Landgericht Ansbach - LG Ansbach) requesting the refund of overpaid premiums as well as information from the controller on all adjustments to premiums in the form of insurance policies, supplements to these policies and all notification letters sent to the data subject during the contractual relationship. The Higher Regional Court Nuremberg (Oberlandesgericht Nürnberg - OLG Nürnberg) held that the data subject had no right to access under Article 15 GDPR because the controller was entitled to reject the request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The court reasoned that this provision merely lists "repetitive character" as an example of an excessive request. However, the use of the word "in particular" makes it clear that the provision also intends to cover other forms of abusive requests. To assess what constitutes an abuse of the right to access, the court referred to the purpose Article 15 GDPR which according to Recital 63 is to enable the data subject to be aware of, and verify, the lawfulness of the processing. The court ruled that the data subject was obviously not interested in verifying the lawfulness of the processing but rather to check whether the adjustments made to the premiums were formally compliant with German insurance law. As a consequence, the court concluded that the request was abusive.

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 8 U 2907/21 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

14 March 2022

Authority

DPA LGAnsbach

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 8 U 2907/21 - Germany (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: