Court case W214 2225733-1 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2021)
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.
An Austrian court case involved a complaint about a company charging fees for better listing positions without informing users. The court found that the company misled users and violated GDPR by not having a valid reason to process personal data. The company was told to stop this practice.
What happened
A company charged fees for better listing positions without informing users, misleading them and processing data without consent.
Who was affected
Users of the company's service who were unaware that listing positions were influenced by payments.
What the authority found
The court found the company misled users and lacked a valid legal basis for processing personal data, violating GDPR rules.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes the need for transparency in business practices and data processing. Companies should clearly inform users about how their data is used and ensure they have a legitimate reason for processing it.
GDPR Articles Cited
The data subject filed in a complaint at the Austrian DPA, in which he claimed that such processing could be misleading users and distorting competition, because only the one who would pay, would be in a better position and it also would not be indicated that the position is upon payment. There was no option for comments and ratings from users or any other way to get a possible better position on a List, than buying one - paying the additional fee. A new database and with it connected processing was also not necessary, since there already was a database made by the federal ministry. Also, the commercial interests of the data processor did not override the fundamental rights of the data subject and the data subject also could not expect that his data will be processed like that. The data subject did not give his consent to this kind of data processing and demanded that the data processing stops. Furthermore, he claimed that the services of the data processor did not have any additional value or advantage – so that his potential customers could reach him better or have any informative advantage in comparison with the database of the federal Ministry where the data was primarily stored. There were also no legitimate interests of the data processor, which would allow the processing on the ground of Article 6(1)(f) GDPR or any other legitimate reason for the processing of personal data. The data subject also claimed a violation of Article 14 GDPR, since the information about the processing came after the processing has already started and was also poor in content. The data processor has upon notice complemented the privacy statement. The data controller claimed that his undertaking did not pursue solely commercial interests, but was also in the interest of the general public since it was a specialized search machine and made it possible to search for a therapist. This fact would give the undertaking of the data processor an additional value, which would override the int
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case W214 2225733-1 in AT
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case W214 2225733-1 - Austria (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: