Court case 4 C 1845/21 – Court Ruling (Germany, 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 German court ruled that an architect did not violate GDPR by not providing a full expert opinion in response to a user's data access request. This decision clarifies that businesses fulfill their data access obligations if they provide the information they believe is complete.
What happened
The court ruled that the architect fulfilled the user's data access request by providing the information they deemed complete.
Who was affected
A property owner whose name was included in an expert opinion prepared by an architect.
What the authority found
The District Court of Pforzheim decided that the architect met GDPR requirements by providing the information they believed was complete, dismissing the user's claim.
Why this matters
This case clarifies that businesses are not required to provide more information than they believe is necessary under GDPR. It sets a precedent for how companies can determine the scope of data access requests.
GDPR Articles Cited
The controller is an architect, building biologist, energy consultant and real estate expert. In 2020, the controller prepared an expert opinion on the value of a property on behalf of the data subject's former wife in the context of a family law dispute. The data subject who had not given prior consent was made identifiable in the expert opinion as the owner of the property by stating his full name. In 2021, the data subject sent an access request to the controller, to which the latter replied without attaching the expert opinion as such to the letter. With several more letters, the data subject claimed damages while calling the controller names and threatening exposure to the Architects' Chamber and the Data Protection Authority. With further letters, he targeted the controller's lawyer. Before the court, the data subject claimed that the information provided was incomplete because it lacked the expert opinion as such. He argued that data relating to any third persons could simply be redacted in the document. The controller claimed that the requested information was not included in the right to access and that any further information would infringe other parties' rights. In any case, the request was unfounded and excessive. The District Court of Pforzheim managed the case. The court dismissed the data subject's claim, agreeing with the controller. First, it held that the data subject's right to access had been fulfilled by the controller. According to the court, the scope of information owed under Article 15 GDPR is dependent on the controller's intention. Once the controller has given the information in accordance with what they believe constitutes the entirety of the data processed, the suspicion that the information provided is incomplete or incorrect cannot justify a claim to information to a greater extent. Essential for the fulfillment of the right to information is therefore the - possibly implied - declaration by the controller that the information
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 4 C 1845/21 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 4 C 1845/21 - Germany (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: