Court case 22/03293 – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2023)
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 Dutch court ruled that a person could not challenge the processing of their data because they missed the deadline to do so. The court found that the six-week time limit for objections was not met. This decision emphasizes the importance of timely responses when dealing with data requests.
What happened
A person attempted to challenge their credit history data but filed the objection too late.
Who was affected
The individual whose credit history was affected by the Dutch Central Credit Registration Office.
What the authority found
The court decided that the objection was invalid because it was submitted after the six-week deadline.
Why this matters
This ruling serves as a reminder for individuals to act quickly when addressing data processing issues. It also highlights the strict timelines that can affect data rights.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
In the present case, the data subject had made an application after the six-week time limit laid down in Article 35(2) UAVG. The facts are as follows. The data subject had taken out a student loan in 2002, and consequently, the details of it were registered in the Dutch Central Credit Registration Office (BKR). This body keeps records of private parties that have taken out credit. In early 2018, the data subject had applied for a loan and was denied due to the financial records on their credit history kept by the BKR. On 27 June 2018, the data subject submitted an objection to processing (Article 21 GDPR) to BKR. By a letter dated 23 July 2018, BKR responded in the negative, refusing to comply with the objection. On 30 October 2018, the data subject made a request to the court to order the controller to comply with the request made under Article 21 GDPR. The Court at first instance dismissed the application because it fell outwith the 6-week time limit under Article 35 UAVG. The data subject appealed this decision. The main question brought before the Court was whether it was possible to raise an objection to the procesing of personal data in summary proceedings following the six-week time limit set out by Article 35(2) of the UAVG (Uitvoeringswet Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming). The UAVG is the Dutch national transposition of the GDPR. Article 35 UAVG implements Article 79 GDPR, and provides: "1. If the decision on a request as referred to in Article 34 has been taken by a body other than an administrative body, the interested party may apply to the court with a written request to order the controller to comply with the request referred to in Articles 15 to 22 of the Regulation. 2. The application shall be made within six weeks of receipt of the answer from the controller. If the controller has not replied within the time limits referred to in Article 12, paragraph 3 of the Regulation, the submission of the application shall not be subject to a period." O
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 22/03293 in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 22/03293 - Netherlands (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: