Court case 322 C 3109/23 (2) – Court Ruling (Germany, 2023)

Court Ruling
DPA AGMnchen26 July 2023Germany
final
Court Ruling

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 German court ruled that an insurance company could keep a record of a vehicle damage claim even after the car was repaired. This matters because it shows that insurers have a right to report certain information, even if the claim is settled. The court decided that the insurer's interest in keeping the data outweighed the individual's request for deletion.

What happened

The court ruled that the insurer could retain information about a vehicle damage claim despite a request to delete it.

Who was affected

The individual who filed the vehicle damage claim and whose data was reported to the insurance directory.

What the authority found

The court held that the insurer had a valid reason to keep the data under GDPR, as it was necessary for reporting purposes.

Why this matters

This ruling clarifies that insurers can maintain certain records for legitimate reasons, highlighting the balance between individual rights and business interests in data retention.

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 17(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 17(1)(d) GDPR
Decision AuthorityAG München
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The plaintiff - the data subject, suffered damage to his vehicle with the vehicle identification number, which is insured with the defendant, on 28.03.2022. The defendant processed and settled this claim as the liable insurer on the basis of a cost estimate submitted by the plaintiff. The calculated repair costs excluding VAT amounted to EUR 3,351.93. The defendant then forwarded the following information to the HIS Information System (HIS - Hinweis- und Informationssystem, a federal directory of the German insurance industry); Date of the fictitious settlement, reporting body, Motor vehicle Reference number of the reporting body, The defendant - the data controller, did not delete or arrange for the deletion of the entry despite a request from the plaintiff or his attorney of record. The data subject claims that the entries in the HIS directory are incorrect, as their vehicle was repaired and therefore there is no fictitious settlement of the damage. Moreover, there was no need for storage due to the repair carried out. In this case, the parties were arguing if the data of the data subject could be deleted upon Article 17 GDPR from the federal Notice and information system, since there was no reason to retain the Data in the system, since the insurance paid for the repair. The court held that, in the case of a fictitious settlement of vehicle damage exceeding EUR 1,500, the comprehensive insurance of the policyholder is authorized to report the occurrence of a fictitious settlement, the amount of the incurred damage, and the vehicle identification number to the HIS Information System. Even in the case of a (flat) claimed repair of the damage with a remaining diminished value, there is still an overriding interest in this reporting, and therefore, no deletion under Article 17 GDPR is required. Even in the event of a proper and expert repair, a balancing of interests under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR indicates a continued interest of the insurer in reporting the data to

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 322 C 3109/23 (2) in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

26 July 2023

Authority

DPA AGMnchen

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 322 C 3109/23 (2) - Germany (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: