CEE Projekte Verwaltung GmbH – Court Ruling (Germany, 2024)

Court Ruling
DPA OLGCelle23 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.

The data subject is managing director of CEE Projekte Verwaltung GmbH, has been listed in the commercial register with their date of birth and residence since September 2012. In 2022, the data subject requested the deletion of their date of birth and residence from the commercial register, citing safety concerns due to their professional involvement with explosives, which could make them a target for kidnapping or robbery. The request was denied by the local court. Subsequently, the data subject appealed this decision, additionally requesting that the transmission of their personal data from the commercial register to third parties only occur after a balancing of interests. The appeal was rejected by the OLG Celle. The data subject then filed a legal complaint with the German Federal Court of Justice, which also upheld the previous decisions, insisting on the necessity of these data being included in the commercial register. The German Federal Court of Justice upheld all lower court's decision, determining that the controller had no right to the deletion of their date of birth and residence from the commercial register under Article 17(1) GDPR. The court ruled that the inclusion of this information is crucial for fulfilling a legal obligation of the register court under both union and national law. First, the court concluded that the data processing was mandated by law, rendering Article 17(3)(b) GDPR applicable, which permits data processing necessary for compliance with a legal obligation. Second, the court found that the data subject's objections under Article 21(1) GDPR were invalid when the data processing is based on Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, necessitated by a legal duty imposed on the controller. Lastly, the court noted that no restriction on processing could be requested under Article 18(1)(d) GDPR, as the data processing was lawful and essential for the register's public function. Hence, the Federal Court of Justice ruled that the residence and the date of

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 17 GDPR
Art. 18 GDPR
Art. 21 GDPR

National Law Articles

§ 10a(3) HGB
§ 395 FamFG
Decision AuthorityBGH
Reviewed AuthorityOLG Celle (Germany)
Full Legal Summary

The data subject is managing director of CEE Projekte Verwaltung GmbH, has been listed in the commercial register with their date of birth and residence since September 2012. In 2022, the data subject requested the deletion of their date of birth and residence from the commercial register, citing safety concerns due to their professional involvement with explosives, which could make them a target for kidnapping or robbery. The request was denied by the local court. Subsequently, the data subject appealed this decision, additionally requesting that the transmission of their personal data from the commercial register to third parties only occur after a balancing of interests. The appeal was rejected by the OLG Celle. The data subject then filed a legal complaint with the German Federal Court of Justice, which also upheld the previous decisions, insisting on the necessity of these data being included in the commercial register. The German Federal Court of Justice upheld all lower court's decision, determining that the controller had no right to the deletion of their date of birth and residence from the commercial register under Article 17(1) GDPR. The court ruled that the inclusion of this information is crucial for fulfilling a legal obligation of the register court under both union and national law. First, the court concluded that the data processing was mandated by law, rendering Article 17(3)(b) GDPR applicable, which permits data processing necessary for compliance with a legal obligation. Second, the court found that the data subject's objections under Article 21(1) GDPR were invalid when the data processing is based on Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, necessitated by a legal duty imposed on the controller. Lastly, the court noted that no restriction on processing could be requested under Article 18(1)(d) GDPR, as the data processing was lawful and essential for the register's public function. Hence, the Federal Court of Justice ruled that the residence and the date of

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for CEE Projekte Verwaltung GmbH in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

23 January 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. CEE Projekte Verwaltung GmbH - Germany (2024). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: