Court case 8 AZR 117/24 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA LAGDsseldorf5 July 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 is a renowned lawyer specialised in employment law and the controller a university operating as a corporation under public law. In 2020, the data subject was sentenced for fraud by a court of first instance (Regional Court of Munich I). In 2022 the Federal Court of Justice overturned this judgment. In June 2021, the controller advertised a temporary position for a lawyer, to which the data subject applied for, enclosing all relevant documents, and then went through the interview process. In July 2021, the data subject received a rejection notice from the controller, stating that it can be seen from publicly available online sources that the data subject had been sentenced for fraud by the court of first instance. Even though the judgement is not yet legally binding, he could only be hired under the resolutory condition of a clean criminal record. He was also informed that another candidate, who matched the requirements better, had been selected. In December 2022, the data subject filed a case with the Court of First Instance (Düsseldorf Labor Court -ArbG Düsseldorf) claiming, amongst other things, that he is entitled to material and immaterial damages due to the unlawful collection of his personal data. The core of the allegations is that that the controller collected the data from the internet without him being aware, the collected data was incorrect and since the controller did not inform him about the processing he was not given the opportunity to comment which had an influence to the outcome of the selection process. The controller claimed that the position had been filled with another applicant who demonstrated better professional competence in comparison to the data subject. The knowledge of the criminal proceedings against the data subject and their evaluation in relation to the position were additional reasons for the rejection. The data subject is not entitled to damages under Article 82(1) GDPR, because the personal data collection d

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 6(1)(b) GDPR
Art. 14(1)(d) GDPR
Decision AuthorityBAG
Reviewed AuthorityLAG Düsseldorf (Germany)
Full Legal Summary

The data subject is a renowned lawyer specialised in employment law and the controller a university operating as a corporation under public law. In 2020, the data subject was sentenced for fraud by a court of first instance (Regional Court of Munich I). In 2022 the Federal Court of Justice overturned this judgment. In June 2021, the controller advertised a temporary position for a lawyer, to which the data subject applied for, enclosing all relevant documents, and then went through the interview process. In July 2021, the data subject received a rejection notice from the controller, stating that it can be seen from publicly available online sources that the data subject had been sentenced for fraud by the court of first instance. Even though the judgement is not yet legally binding, he could only be hired under the resolutory condition of a clean criminal record. He was also informed that another candidate, who matched the requirements better, had been selected. In December 2022, the data subject filed a case with the Court of First Instance (Düsseldorf Labor Court -ArbG Düsseldorf) claiming, amongst other things, that he is entitled to material and immaterial damages due to the unlawful collection of his personal data. The core of the allegations is that that the controller collected the data from the internet without him being aware, the collected data was incorrect and since the controller did not inform him about the processing he was not given the opportunity to comment which had an influence to the outcome of the selection process. The controller claimed that the position had been filled with another applicant who demonstrated better professional competence in comparison to the data subject. The knowledge of the criminal proceedings against the data subject and their evaluation in relation to the position were additional reasons for the rejection. The data subject is not entitled to damages under Article 82(1) GDPR, because the personal data collection d

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 8 AZR 117/24 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

5 July 2025

Authority

DPA LAGDsseldorf

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 8 AZR 117/24 - Germany (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: