Court case W137 2308681-1 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2025)
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 filed a complaint on 07.05.2024 with the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSB), alleging that an Estonian company located in Tallinn, Estonia, had failed to fully respond to a request for access under Article 15 GDPR. By 12.02.2025, more than six months later, the DSB had not issued a decision. As a result, the data subject filed an inactivity complaint with the DSB, arguing that it had failed to act within the legally required time. By letter dated 17.02.2025, the DSB informed the data subject that the complaint had been forwarded to the Estonian supervisory authority, which would assume responsibility as the lead supervisory authority. By letter from the DSB dated 20.02.2025, the inactivity complaint was transmitted to the Federal Administrative Court. It stated in particular that, due to cross-border processing, the Estonian supervisory authority is allegedly the responsible authority under the procedure referred to in Article 60 GDPR, and that the decision-making period is suspended for the duration of this procedure, in accordance with national procedural law. The Court dismissed the inactivity complaint as unfounded. Under Austrian procedural law, specifically [https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/NormDokument.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=20008255&FassungVom=2025-02-02&Artikel=&Paragraf=8&Anlage=&Uebergangsrecht= § 8(1) VwGVG] and [https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/1999/165/A2P24/NOR40262693?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Kundmachungsorgan=&Index=&Titel=dsg&Gesetzesnummer=&VonArtikel=&BisArtikel=&VonParagraf=24&BisParagraf=&VonAnlage=&BisAnlage=&Typ=&Kundmachungsnummer=&Unterzeichnungsdatum=&FassungVom=12.09.2024&VonInkrafttretedatum=&BisInkrafttretedatum=&VonAusserkrafttretedatum=&BisAusserkrafttretedatum=&NormabschnittnummerKombination=Und&ImRisSeitVonDatum=&ImRisSeitBisDatum=&ImRisSeit=Undefined&ResultPageSize=100&Suchworte=&Position=1&SkipToDocumentPage=true&ResultFunctionToken=f3119544-88f3-40ff-a7b3-a77e97056d8d § 24 DSG,] an inactivity
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
The data subject filed a complaint on 07.05.2024 with the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSB), alleging that an Estonian company located in Tallinn, Estonia, had failed to fully respond to a request for access under Article 15 GDPR. By 12.02.2025, more than six months later, the DSB had not issued a decision. As a result, the data subject filed an inactivity complaint with the DSB, arguing that it had failed to act within the legally required time. By letter dated 17.02.2025, the DSB informed the data subject that the complaint had been forwarded to the Estonian supervisory authority, which would assume responsibility as the lead supervisory authority. By letter from the DSB dated 20.02.2025, the inactivity complaint was transmitted to the Federal Administrative Court. It stated in particular that, due to cross-border processing, the Estonian supervisory authority is allegedly the responsible authority under the procedure referred to in Article 60 GDPR, and that the decision-making period is suspended for the duration of this procedure, in accordance with national procedural law. The Court dismissed the inactivity complaint as unfounded. Under Austrian procedural law, specifically [https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/NormDokument.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=20008255&FassungVom=2025-02-02&Artikel=&Paragraf=8&Anlage=&Uebergangsrecht= § 8(1) VwGVG] and [https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/1999/165/A2P24/NOR40262693?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Kundmachungsorgan=&Index=&Titel=dsg&Gesetzesnummer=&VonArtikel=&BisArtikel=&VonParagraf=24&BisParagraf=&VonAnlage=&BisAnlage=&Typ=&Kundmachungsnummer=&Unterzeichnungsdatum=&FassungVom=12.09.2024&VonInkrafttretedatum=&BisInkrafttretedatum=&VonAusserkrafttretedatum=&BisAusserkrafttretedatum=&NormabschnittnummerKombination=Und&ImRisSeitVonDatum=&ImRisSeitBisDatum=&ImRisSeit=Undefined&ResultPageSize=100&Suchworte=&Position=1&SkipToDocumentPage=true&ResultFunctionToken=f3119544-88f3-40ff-a7b3-a77e97056d8d § 24 DSG,] an inactivity
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case W137 2308681-1 in AT
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case W137 2308681-1 - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: