- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Austria · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case W258 2299744-1 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2025)
Privacy enforcement record
This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
An Austrian company was found to have improperly used video surveillance, recording customers without a valid reason. The court ruled that this violated GDPR principles, leading to a significant fine. This case underscores the need for businesses to use surveillance responsibly.
What happened
The company operated a video surveillance system that recorded customers during transactions without proper justification.
Who was affected
Customers who were recorded by the company's video surveillance system.
What the authority found
The court determined that the company violated GDPR by lacking a valid legal basis for excessive data collection through surveillance.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the importance of proportionality and necessity in data collection practices. Companies should carefully evaluate their surveillance measures to ensure compliance with data protection laws.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Review needed — 19 March 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified, amount discrepancy, authority corrected.
Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources
A company (the controller) was operating a video surveillance system, consisting of a total of nine external and indoor cameras. After an anonymous complaint, the DSB opened administrative criminal proceedings and found that the controller had unlawfully processed personal data in the period from March 2022 to at least May 2022 and data subjects located in the following reception areas were recorded, including during payment transactions and PIN code entries. In fact, approximately 637 PIN entries were estimated to have been recorded. The processing of personal data carried out by the video surveillance system considered from the DSB not to be proportionate to its intended purpose and to go beyond what was necessary for the intended purpose of the surveillance, without a relevant legal basis and in defiance of the principle of fairness and data minimization violating Article 6(1), Article 5(1)(a) and Article 5(1)(c) of the GDPR respectively. As a result, the appellant was fined €1.5 million with an additional €150,000 in procedural costs. The controller appealed, arguing that some footage did not contain identifiable personal data, that many customers used payment methods not requiring PIN entry or covered it during entry, and that surveillance was necessary for security purposes. It also claimed the fine was disproportionate, particularly because the turnover of the parent company was improperly considered in its calculation. It requested the penalty decision to be fully repealed and the proceedings discontinued, or alternatively, that the penalty be reduced to a warning, or at least that the fine be adjusted to a proportionate and appropriate amount. On 2024 the Appeal submitted further to the Federal Administrative Court. The Court partially upheld and partially dismissed the appeal. Specifically, it found that the video surveillance system violated 5(1)(a), 5(1)(c), and 6(1) GDPR due to the lack of a valid legal basis and excessive data collection. It argued
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case W258 2299744-1 in AT
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Ruling Date
25 July 2025
Authority
Datenschutzbehörde
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case W258 2299744-1 - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: