Court case VI ZR 15/23 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2024)

Court Ruling
DPA OLGCelle6 February 2024Germany
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.

The data subject has private health and long-term care insurance with the controller. The controller increased the contributions in 2018 and 2020. The data subject considers the premium increases to be unlawful. Consequently, in civil court, the data subject requested information on the basis of Article 15(1) GDPR from the controller about premium increases starting from 2016, including justifications for the premium adjustment and supplements to the insurance policy. The Landsgericht Verden (Regional Court of Verden) upheld the action. The controller appealed the decision to the Oberlandesgerichts Celle (Higher Regional Court of Celle). However, the Court of Appeal held that the data subject is entitled to the asserted right to information under Article 15(1) GDPR. It found that letters from the controller to the data subject, even standard letters sent to a large number of recipients with the same content, are subject to the right to information as they contain information about the data subject. The controller appealed to the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH). The Federal Court of Justice held that the access request by the data subject cannot be affirmed based on the reasoning of the Court of Appeal. Article 15 GDPR and the GDPR as such are applicable, even if the processing occurred before the GDPR came into force in 2018. This is because the request was submitted after 2018. The CJEU previously ruled that “it is applicable to a request for access to the information referred to in that provision where the processing operations which that request concerns were carried out before the date on which that regulation became applicable, but the request was submitted after that date.” (see [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62021CJ0579 CJEU Case C-579/21], para 36). However, Article 15 GDPR cannot be used in the case at issue, because of the following reasons: Firstly, in light of the broad scope of personal data und

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 15(1) GDPR
Decision AuthorityBGH
Reviewed AuthorityOLG Celle (Germany)
Full Legal Summary

The data subject has private health and long-term care insurance with the controller. The controller increased the contributions in 2018 and 2020. The data subject considers the premium increases to be unlawful. Consequently, in civil court, the data subject requested information on the basis of Article 15(1) GDPR from the controller about premium increases starting from 2016, including justifications for the premium adjustment and supplements to the insurance policy. The Landsgericht Verden (Regional Court of Verden) upheld the action. The controller appealed the decision to the Oberlandesgerichts Celle (Higher Regional Court of Celle). However, the Court of Appeal held that the data subject is entitled to the asserted right to information under Article 15(1) GDPR. It found that letters from the controller to the data subject, even standard letters sent to a large number of recipients with the same content, are subject to the right to information as they contain information about the data subject. The controller appealed to the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH). The Federal Court of Justice held that the access request by the data subject cannot be affirmed based on the reasoning of the Court of Appeal. Article 15 GDPR and the GDPR as such are applicable, even if the processing occurred before the GDPR came into force in 2018. This is because the request was submitted after 2018. The CJEU previously ruled that “it is applicable to a request for access to the information referred to in that provision where the processing operations which that request concerns were carried out before the date on which that regulation became applicable, but the request was submitted after that date.” (see [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62021CJ0579 CJEU Case C-579/21], para 36). However, Article 15 GDPR cannot be used in the case at issue, because of the following reasons: Firstly, in light of the broad scope of personal data und

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case VI ZR 15/23 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

6 February 2024

Authority

DPA OLGCelle

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 VI ZR 15/23 - Germany (2024). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: