Court case 1 R 461/24 OVG – Court Ruling (Germany, 2025)

The data subject filed a complaint with a DPA regarding a GDPR violation. When the DPA did not decide to the data subject's satisfaction the data subject initiated administrative court proceedings to order the DPA to take effective supervisory action. Regarding this proceeding the data subject was issued an administrative court cost statement, to which it filed an objection at the Administrative Court of Schwerin (Verwaltungsgericht Schwerin - VG Schwerin). The data subject argued that Article 57(3) GDPR, which ensures cost-free procedures before the DPA, should also apply to judicial proceedings. The VG Schwerin dismissed the objection. The data subject then appealed the court’s decision to the Higher Administrative Court. The Higher Administrative Court clarified that Article 57(3) GDPR only applies to tasks performed by the DPA, such as handling complaints and taking action based on data protection law. The court emphasized the difference between administrative proceedings before DPAs and judicial proceedings. It relied on Section 188 of the German Code of Administrative Court Procedure ([https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_vwgo/englisch_vwgo.html#p0866 Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung - VwGO]) to determine the rules regarding court costs, finding that this provision is conclusive on exemptions for court costs and does not include exemptions for GDPR related claims. Thus, it reached the conclusion that Article 57(3) GDPR does not cover judicial proceedings, which are a separate legal process governed by national law. In its ruling, the Higher Administrative Court rejected the appeal, affirming that Article 57(3) GDPR, which guarantees cost-free procedures before DPAs, does not extend to judicial proceedings. The court stated, that it did not find it necessary to refer the question of judicial costs for GDPR claims to the CJEU.