- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 332 O 243/21 – 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 decided that an insurance company could deny a customer's request for access to their personal data because the request was excessive. The court found that the customer was using the access request for purposes unrelated to data protection. This ruling clarifies the limits of access rights under data protection laws.
What happened
A customer requested access to their personal data from an insurance company but was denied.
Who was affected
The customer who sought access to their personal data to challenge an increase in insurance contributions.
What the authority found
The court ruled that the insurance company could refuse the access request as it was deemed excessive and unrelated to data protection.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights that access requests must be reasonable and relevant to data protection, helping to define the boundaries of such rights.
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 — 21 March 2026.
No issues were reported by that automated check.
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 and the controller – an insurance company – had a civil proceeding concerning the increase of the contributions the data subject was expected to pay to be insured with the controller. In particular, the data subject claimed that such increases were illegitimate. To prove this point, the data subject requested access to their personal data pursuant to Article 15 GDPR. The controller denied access. Therefore, the data subject requested the Regional Court of Hamburg (Landgericht Hamburg – LG Hamburg) to order the controller to provide access to the information at issue. The court adjudicated on the access request in the context of the broader civil proceeding pending between the parties. The court rejected the data subject’s claim. In particular, the court found that the controller could refuse to consider the data subject’s access request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. As a matter of fact, the request was ‘excessive’ and could be framed as a case of abuse of right. According to the court, the purpose of Article 15 GDPR is expressed by Recital 63 of the Regulation, which clearly states that an access request should enable a data subject to become aware of data processing involving their data and check the lawfulness of processing operations. In the present case, the data subject tried to Article 15 GDPR for a purpose that had nothing to do with data protection. The dispute between data subject and controller was in reality only an insurance law dispute.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 332 O 243/21 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 332 O 243/21 - Germany (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: