- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 33 O 461/22 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2023)
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 Germany ruled that Facebook did not violate data protection rules despite a data breach affecting 533 million users. The court found that the user had willingly shared their phone number, which led to the breach. This decision highlights the importance of user responsibility in managing personal data online.
What happened
Facebook did not violate data protection rules after a data breach linked phone numbers to user profiles.
Who was affected
A Facebook user whose phone number was linked to their profile and affected by the data breach.
What the authority found
The court decided that Facebook provided sufficient transparency about data processing, and the user had willingly shared their phone number.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that users must be proactive in managing their privacy settings. It also suggests that companies may not be held liable if users do not take necessary precautions with their personal information.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 18 March 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, authority 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
The data subject was a Facebook user. According to the privacy settings selected at the moment of the facts, their phone number could be used by a third person to find the data subject’s profile on Facebook, even if the phone number itself was not public. Accordingly, information relating to the data subject could be linked to their phone number by anyone in possession of such a number. In 2019, unknown third parties automatically combined telephone numbers and matched them with Facebook profiles thanks to the above-mentioned function. In this way, telephone numbers could be assigned to identified users. This resulted in a data breach concerning 533 million people in 106 different countries. The data subject lamented that since the data breach they received phishing emails and calls. In light of the loss of control over their personal data, the data subject claimed damages for €1,000 under Article 82 GDPR. According to the District Court of Deggendorf (Landgericht Deggendorf), the controller did not violate its duty of transparency pursuant to Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, as it provided a multi-layered explanation of what data were processed and how. It was up to the data subject to read this data protection policy and change the relevant settings. To the contrary, the data subject willingly provided their phone number, even if such piece of information was not necessary to use the social network. In the view of the court, the controller did not contravene its obligations pursuant to Article 32 and 33 GDPR either, since the data subject consciously made public their private details, with consequences that were transparently explained by the controller in its privacy policy. Therefore, no obligation concerning security measures and data breaches came into play in the case at issue. In a long obiter dictum, the court also concerned itself with the problem of Article 82 GDPR and the compensability of non-material damages. The court stressed that following the CJEU judgeme
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 33 O 461/22 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Ruling Date
20 June 2023
Authority
DPA LGDeggendorf
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 33 O 461/22 - Germany (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: