Twitter – Court Ruling (Germany, 2024)

Court Ruling
DPA LGKln25 January 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.

A German court ruled that Twitter must restore a user's account after it was deactivated without proper notice. This decision is important because it emphasizes that companies need to follow clear procedures when managing user accounts. Small business owners should ensure they have transparent policies for account management.

What happened

Twitter deactivated a user's account and the court ordered it to restore the account.

Who was affected

The user whose Twitter account was deactivated and sought legal action.

What the authority found

The court found that Twitter had not provided a valid reason for the account deactivation and must restore it.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the need for companies to have clear and fair account management practices. It serves as a reminder for businesses to communicate effectively with users about account actions.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 16(GDPR)
Art. 17(3)(e) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 16(GDPR)
Art. 17(3)(e) GDPR

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

National Law Articles

AI-identified

§ 249(1) BGB
§ 280(1) BGB
§ 3(2)(5) NetzDG a.F.
Decision AuthorityOLG Köln
Reviewed AuthorityLG Köln (Germany)
Source verified 21 March 2026
articles corrected
authority corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The data subject was a registered user of Twitter, operated by the parent company of the controller. The data subject posted on multiple occasions content that the controller removed on the same days. On 13 February 2022, the controller deactivated the data subject's account and notified them. The data subject sought legal redress, and the LG Köln ordered the controller to fully restore the profile, provide information on whether the deactivation had been undertaken by a third-party company, and cover the data subject's legal costs. The court rejected the data subject's additional requests for data correction, prevention of further account blocking, and damages of €1,500. The data subject appealed, seeking these rejected requests. The controller, however, withdrew its appeal. The Higher Regional Court of Cologne dismissed the data subject's appeal. First, the court held that the data subject's request to delete all deletion and blocking notes from their user data record did not establish a valid deletion claim under Article 17 GDPR#1 as the upcoming legal processes made the data necessary for the defence of legal claims Article 17 GDPR#3e. The court found that the controller's documentation of violations against its terms did not entitle the data subject to a correction claim under Article 16 GDPR. The statements on the deletion counter were not factual inaccuracies but legal assessments. Thus, the claim for correction rights according to Article 16 GDPR did not apply. Third, the court examined the request to prevent future account blocks without prior notification and found it excessively broad. Certain scenarios, such as blocking for unlawful content, permitted the controller's immediate action under legal compliance obligations. Therefore, this claim was unreasonable. astly, the court dismissed the request for damages, as the appeal did not present a clear basis for differentiating claimed material and immaterial damages (€1,500 total), which contravened proce

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Twitter in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

25 January 2024

Authority

DPA LGKln

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Twitter - Germany (2024). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: