Enforcing jurisdiction
Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
Privacy topics

Court case 3 Sa 33/22 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2023)

Court Ruling
DPA ArbGPforzheim27 July 2023Germany
final
Court Ruling

Privacy enforcement record

This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A court decided that a company could not be held liable for damages simply for delaying a response to a request about personal data. However, the company was found to have used a former employee's image without permission, leading to a €10,000 compensation. This case emphasizes the need for companies to respect individuals' rights over their images.

What happened

The company used a former employee's image in promotional materials without their consent.

Who was affected

The former employee whose image was used without permission.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the company violated the former employee's rights by using their image without consent and awarded €10,000 in damages.

Why this matters

This ruling reinforces the importance of obtaining consent for using someone's image. Companies must ensure they have the right permissions to avoid costly legal issues.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 15(1) GDPR
Art. 17(3) GDPR
Art. 4(11) GDPR
Art. 82(1) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(11) GDPR
Art. 15(1) GDPR
Art. 17(3) GDPR
Art. 82(1) GDPR

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

Decision AuthorityLAG Baden-Württemberg
Reviewed AuthorityArbG Pforzheim (Germany)

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 22 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified, authority corrected.

Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The data subject was employed as a wrapping technician by the controller, a company in the advertising technology industry. While employed, the data subject agreed to the production of photos and a promotional video which featured him prominently. After leaving the company on 1 May 2019 to work for a competitor, the data subject requested the controller multiple times to cease using and delete the photos and video featuring him, but the controller initially did not comply. On 21 February 2020, the controller finally removed the materials after receiving multiple formal requests from the data subject’s legal representative. The data subject sought non-material damages under Article 82 GDPR due to these violations, including the unauthorized use of their image for commercial purposes. The LAG Baden-Württemberg decided that the delayed response to an access request under Article 15 GDPR does not constitute non-material damage in itself. The court clarified that a mere breach of GDPR provisions is not sufficient to establish a claim for damages under Article 82 GDPR. The rationale is that the law requires concrete evidence of harm beyond the violation of GDPR regulations. First, the court held that the controller’s unconsented use of the data subject's image post-employment violated Article 17 GDPR, justifying a compensation of €10,000 due to the significant damage to their personality rights along with the commercial exploitation without permission. Second, it addressed the data subject's request for detailed information on all personal data processed by the controller under Article 15 GDPR. The court noted this request lacked the specificity required by § 253(2) No. 2 ZPO. Consequently, it ruled that a general request for all personal data does not meet the necessary clarity and precision. Finally, the court rejected the claim for additional damages due to the delayed compliance with the access request, ruling that no non-material damage was proven by the data subj

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 3 Sa 33/22 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

27 July 2023

Authority

DPA ArbGPforzheim

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 3 Sa 33/22 - Germany (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: