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

The Board of Mayor and Aldermen of the Municipality of Amsterdam, Education, Youth and Care – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA RbAmsterdam27 July 2022Netherlands
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.

A court in Amsterdam ruled that a municipality provided enough information to an undocumented immigrant about his personal data. The immigrant wanted access to all data processed about him but did not specify his request clearly. This ruling shows the importance of clear communication in data access requests.

What happened

The court decided that the municipality's response to the immigrant's access request was sufficient.

Who was affected

An undocumented immigrant living in a shelter who requested access to his personal data from the municipality.

What the authority found

The court found that the immigrant did not adequately specify his access request, which placed an unreasonable burden on the municipality.

Why this matters

This case highlights the need for individuals to be specific when requesting access to their personal data. Website operators should encourage clear communication to facilitate compliance with access requests.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 4 GDPR
Art. 12 GDPR
Art. 4(2) GDPR
Art. 15(1) GDPR
Art. 15(3) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(GDPR)
Art. 4(2) GDPR
Art. 12(GDPR)
Art. 15(1) GDPR
Art. 15(3) GDPR

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

Decision AuthorityRb. Amsterdam

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 20 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles 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 data subject was an undocumented immigrant who lived in a shelter. He invoked his right to access and requested a copy of all his personal data processed by the municipality (controller), including internal emails and messages regarding the data subject (Articles 12 and 15(1) GDPR). He also requested access to personal data which was processed by the controller's employees using certain services, for example Microsoft (Office 365 and Exchange), Facebook (Whatsapp, Messenger), Telegram and Signal. His goal was to get insight in how the controller was monitoring and assessing him, to determine, among other things, which shelter should be offered to him. The controller asked the data subject to specify his access request, to which the latter did not reply (more precisely, the data subject stated that he was not able to specify his request any further because he did not know the specifics of the processing). The controller answered the request by providing a general overview of the personal data processed and three partially anonymized copies of documents. Being not satisfied with the controller's response, the data subject filed an action before the competent court. During the procedure, the court also revealed that the data subject had already send multiple similar access requests to the same controller in the past. The court concluded that the controller's answer to the access request was sufficient. The court found that the data subject had not sufficiently specified his access request. The general nature of his request would have placed a disproportionate burden on the controller, considering the large amount of personal data processed, which would result in disproportionate amount of time and financial resources spent by the controller to search for the requested personal data. The court also considered here that the data subject had already filed multiple similar requests in the past. Also, the controller had asked the data subject to specify his requ

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for The Board of Mayor and Aldermen of the Municipality of Amsterdam, Education, Youth and Care in NL

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

Details

Ruling Date

27 July 2022

Authority

DPA RbAmsterdam

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. The Board of Mayor and Aldermen of the Municipality of Amsterdam, Education, Youth and Care - Netherlands (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: