Court case 5 U 129/24 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA LGHannover20 March 2025Germany
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 was a user of a platform provided by the controller. An unknown third-party used the possibility of finding user accounts through the users’ phone numbers for scraping the platform by randomly generating phone numbers and searching for users, on the basis of a default setting set by the controller. The data subject was affected by this data "scraping incident", that resulted in loss of control of their data. The data subject filed a lawsuit with the first instance court. At first instance, the court ordered the controller to pay the data subject €500 for non-material damages and granted the requests for declaratory and injunctive relief. Both parties appealed the decision of the court of first instance before the Higher Regional Court of Celle (Oberlandesgericht Celle – OLG Celle). The court amended the decision of the court of first instance. It ordered the controller to pay the data subject the amount of €100 pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR and established that the controller is obliged to compensate the data subject for all material future damages. However, it confirmed the court of first instance's order to cease and desist from any further infringements of this provision under penalty of a fine, to refrain from disclosing personal data of the data subject’s side to third parties, in particular the telephone number or other non-public data points, on the basis of a default setting set by the controller and to refrain from processing the data subject's telephone number on the basis of consent, which was obtained due to the confusing and incomplete information provided by the controller. First, the court held that the controller violated the principle of data minimisation pursuant to Article 5(1)(b), Article 5(1)(c) and Article 25(2)(b) GDPR. Following the lead decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof - BGH) - VI ZR 10/24 from 18 November 2024, the court held that the mere loss of control over one's personal data as a

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 82(1) GDPR
Decision AuthorityOLG Celle
Reviewed AuthorityLG Hannover
Full Legal Summary

The data subject was a user of a platform provided by the controller. An unknown third-party used the possibility of finding user accounts through the users’ phone numbers for scraping the platform by randomly generating phone numbers and searching for users, on the basis of a default setting set by the controller. The data subject was affected by this data "scraping incident", that resulted in loss of control of their data. The data subject filed a lawsuit with the first instance court. At first instance, the court ordered the controller to pay the data subject €500 for non-material damages and granted the requests for declaratory and injunctive relief. Both parties appealed the decision of the court of first instance before the Higher Regional Court of Celle (Oberlandesgericht Celle – OLG Celle). The court amended the decision of the court of first instance. It ordered the controller to pay the data subject the amount of €100 pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR and established that the controller is obliged to compensate the data subject for all material future damages. However, it confirmed the court of first instance's order to cease and desist from any further infringements of this provision under penalty of a fine, to refrain from disclosing personal data of the data subject’s side to third parties, in particular the telephone number or other non-public data points, on the basis of a default setting set by the controller and to refrain from processing the data subject's telephone number on the basis of consent, which was obtained due to the confusing and incomplete information provided by the controller. First, the court held that the controller violated the principle of data minimisation pursuant to Article 5(1)(b), Article 5(1)(c) and Article 25(2)(b) GDPR. Following the lead decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof - BGH) - VI ZR 10/24 from 18 November 2024, the court held that the mere loss of control over one's personal data as a

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Violations (2)

Third-Party Cookies Without Consent
critical

Third-party tracking cookies or scripts are loaded without obtaining prior user consent.

Art. 13, 14 GDPR

Unclear Cookie Information
high

The cookie banner or cookie policy provides vague, incomplete, or unclear information about what cookies are used and why.

Art. 12, 13 GDPR

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 5 U 129/24 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

20 March 2025

Authority

DPA LGHannover

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 5 U 129/24 - Germany (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: