Court case 22/4916 – 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 public prosecutor's office correctly responded to a person's request for access to their personal data. The person claimed the response was incomplete, but the court found that the office provided a general overview as required. This case highlights the importance of clear and specific requests for personal data.
What happened
A person requested access to their personal data from the Board of Public Prosecutor’s office.
Who was affected
The individual who made the access request to the Board of Public Prosecutor’s office.
What the authority found
The court held that the Board adequately responded to the access request, as it was too general in nature.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that individuals need to be specific when requesting their personal data. It also shows that organizations can respond appropriately to broad requests without being penalized.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
A data subject had submitted an access request to the Board of Public Prosecutor’s office seeking to obtain information about any personal data about him being processed by the Board. The Board, as a defendant, treated his request as a general access request under Article 15 GDPR and [https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0014194/2023-11-01 Article 39(i) Judicial and Criminal Records Act (Wet justitiële en strafvorderlijke gegevens - WJSG]). Under [https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0014194/2023-11-01 Article 39(i) of the WJSG], data subjects have the right to request the Board to obtain confirmation as to whether criminal records about them is being processed and, if so, to obtain information about the processing thereof. On 31 August 2022, the Board thus provided the data subject with two separate documents, one regarding the criminal records about him that were being processed under the WJSG and the other containing all other personal data about him being processed under the GDPR. The data subject, the plaintiff claimed that the response was incomplete. The defendant thus asked him to substantiate his request and the data subject answered that he wished to receive all data concerning him that was being processed. The defendant then added additional personal data and criminal records of the plaintiff that were found in its database. Still unsatisfied with the response, the plaintiff appealed against the judgment. The court issued its final judgment on 20 September 2023 and held that, since the access request by the data subject was drafted in general terms and had a broad scope, the defendant correctly replied with a general overview of the personal data and criminal records about him being processed. The plaintiff objected to this response and the defendant asked him to specify his request in line with Recital 63 GDPR. As the plaintiff again answered in general terms, claiming he requested access to all his personal data, the court held that the defendant was right in r
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 22/4916 in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 22/4916 - Netherlands (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: