Court case 2 R 192/24h – Court Ruling (Austria, 2024)

Court Ruling
DPA LGKlagenfurt9 December 2024Austria
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 controller is an online casino-game provider. The data subject set up an account, deposited money and lost it on the website. On 23rd May 2024, the data subject submitted (through his representative) an access request with the controller requesting access to their personal data, and specifically, all deposits and withdrawals and the stakes, wins and losses made on his account. The access request was made through the data subject’s representative, and included an electronically signed power of attorney and a copy of the data subject’s ID. On 26th May 2024, the controller refused the applicant’s request, asking for a handwritten power of attorney signed by the plaintiff in ink. The data subject did not respond to the controller’s response and filed the present action on 5th July 2024 with the Regional Court of Klagenfurt. The data subject sought that the controller be compelled to provide a digital copy of the data requested. On August 1st 2024, the controller sent further communication to the data subject’s representative and, in light of having received notice of the claim filed, deemed there to be a legally valid power of attorney within the meaning of Section 8 RAO and provided the information requested by the data subject on 23rd May. On 9th October, the data subject, having received the requested information, limited the scope of their filing to request only reimbursement of the costs incurred in the court proceeding. The trial court ruled that the controller could not rely on § 45 ZPO, an Austrian Civil Procedure provision which requires plaintiffs in a proceeding to bear the costs of such proceeding where the cause of action is not attributable to the action of the defendant and the defendant immediately acknowledges the claim in action. The controller had argued that this provision should apply as the power of attorney received in May 2024 was invalid. The trial judge ordered the controller to reimburse the data subject for their legal costs, to the

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 12 GDPR
Art. 15 GDPR
Art. 12(2) GDPR

National Law Articles

§ 45 ZPO
Decision AuthorityOLG Graz
Reviewed AuthorityLG Klagenfurt (Austria)
Full Legal Summary

The data controller is an online casino-game provider. The data subject set up an account, deposited money and lost it on the website. On 23rd May 2024, the data subject submitted (through his representative) an access request with the controller requesting access to their personal data, and specifically, all deposits and withdrawals and the stakes, wins and losses made on his account. The access request was made through the data subject’s representative, and included an electronically signed power of attorney and a copy of the data subject’s ID. On 26th May 2024, the controller refused the applicant’s request, asking for a handwritten power of attorney signed by the plaintiff in ink. The data subject did not respond to the controller’s response and filed the present action on 5th July 2024 with the Regional Court of Klagenfurt. The data subject sought that the controller be compelled to provide a digital copy of the data requested. On August 1st 2024, the controller sent further communication to the data subject’s representative and, in light of having received notice of the claim filed, deemed there to be a legally valid power of attorney within the meaning of Section 8 RAO and provided the information requested by the data subject on 23rd May. On 9th October, the data subject, having received the requested information, limited the scope of their filing to request only reimbursement of the costs incurred in the court proceeding. The trial court ruled that the controller could not rely on § 45 ZPO, an Austrian Civil Procedure provision which requires plaintiffs in a proceeding to bear the costs of such proceeding where the cause of action is not attributable to the action of the defendant and the defendant immediately acknowledges the claim in action. The controller had argued that this provision should apply as the power of attorney received in May 2024 was invalid. The trial judge ordered the controller to reimburse the data subject for their legal costs, to the

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 2 R 192/24h in AT

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

Details

Ruling Date

9 December 2024

Authority

DPA LGKlagenfurt

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 2 R 192/24h - Austria (2024). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: