Court case 2 O 186/22 – 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 against a person who wanted more information about their health insurance premium increase. The court said the request was an abuse of rights because it wasn't about checking data processing but about pursuing benefits. This case clarifies that requests under GDPR should focus on data processing transparency, not other purposes.
What happened
A court dismissed a request for supplementary information about health insurance premium increases, deeming it an abuse of rights under GDPR.
Who was affected
A health insurance policyholder seeking additional information about their premium increase.
What the authority found
The court held that the request for information was an abuse of rights under GDPR, as it was not related to understanding data processing but aimed at pursuing benefits.
Why this matters
This ruling clarifies that GDPR's right of access is intended for understanding data processing, not for other unrelated purposes. Businesses should ensure that access requests align with GDPR's transparency goals.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
The data subject contracted a private health insurance with the controller. The controller informed the data subject that their insurance premiums would increase. The data subject received the corresponding insurance certificates from the controller. Subsequently, the data subject unsuccessfully requested additional supplementary information about the increase of premiums. Consequently, the data subject decided to sue to controller, arguing that the controller is obliged to give them access to the supplementary information pursuant to Article 15 GDPR. Additionally, the data subject referred to other court proceedings which held invalid comparable premium increases from the same insurance company, to clarify the reasons for their claim for supplementary information. The court dismissed the claim based on Article 15 GDPR. It held that the access request constituted an abuse of rights (Section 242 of the German Civil Code). According to this principle, an exercise of a right is not permitted if, among other things, the claimant takes advantage of a formal legal position or asserts something in which he or she has no self-interest worth protecting. According to the intention of the data subject, the requested information is to serve exclusively the pursuit of benefit claims. This is a purpose completely unrelated to the purpose of Article 15 GDPR. According to recital 63 of the GDPR, the right of access under Article 15 GDPR serves the data subject to be aware of the processing of their personal data and to be able to check its lawfulness. Thus, Article 15 GDPR is intended to enable a lawfulness check on data processing operations. The data subject should be able to assess the scope and content of the stored data. Moreover, the information received through Article 15 GDPR also serves to enable the data subject to exercise further rights under the GDPR, in particular the right to rectification under Article 16 GDPR, the right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR, and the
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 2 O 186/22 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 2 O 186/22 - Germany (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: