Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband – Court Ruling (Germany, 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 Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband – vzbv) brought an action against ImmobilienScout24 GmbH, the operator of an online real estate platform in Germany. The controller offered users a “self-disclosure form” to fill out before contacting landlords. This form collected extensive personal data, such as name, address, employment details, and income. Some fields were marked as mandatory. The website also promoted credit reports by a German credit information agency (i.e. SCHUFA), stating that landlords increasingly required them before apartment viewings. The vzbv claimed that this practice violated the GDPR because the data were collected without a valid legal basis. It further argued that the SCHUFA advertising was misleading under the German Unfair Competition Act (Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb – UWG), as it falsely suggested that tenants were obliged to provide credit reports at an early stage. Accordingly, vzbv requested two injunctions to stop the processing of personal data in connection with the self-disclosure form and to prohibit misleading advertising about SCHUFA credit reports. The Regional Court of Berlin (Landgericht Berlin – LG Berlin) upheld both claims. It found that the controller’s data processing violated Article 5(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 6(1) GDPR, and that its advertising breached the UWG. The Court held that the controller had no valid legal basis for collecting data via the self-disclosure form. There was no valid consent according to Article 6(1)(a) GDPR, as filling out the form could not be considered voluntary and unambiguous and the processing lacked a specific purpose. Many fields were mandatory and the purpose of processing was only vaguely described. The court also found that the processing was not necessary for pre-contractual measures under Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, as it was not indispensable to initiate rental negotiations. Similarly, the Court rejected that there was a le
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
The Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband – vzbv) brought an action against ImmobilienScout24 GmbH, the operator of an online real estate platform in Germany. The controller offered users a “self-disclosure form” to fill out before contacting landlords. This form collected extensive personal data, such as name, address, employment details, and income. Some fields were marked as mandatory. The website also promoted credit reports by a German credit information agency (i.e. SCHUFA), stating that landlords increasingly required them before apartment viewings. The vzbv claimed that this practice violated the GDPR because the data were collected without a valid legal basis. It further argued that the SCHUFA advertising was misleading under the German Unfair Competition Act (Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb – UWG), as it falsely suggested that tenants were obliged to provide credit reports at an early stage. Accordingly, vzbv requested two injunctions to stop the processing of personal data in connection with the self-disclosure form and to prohibit misleading advertising about SCHUFA credit reports. The Regional Court of Berlin (Landgericht Berlin – LG Berlin) upheld both claims. It found that the controller’s data processing violated Article 5(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 6(1) GDPR, and that its advertising breached the UWG. The Court held that the controller had no valid legal basis for collecting data via the self-disclosure form. There was no valid consent according to Article 6(1)(a) GDPR, as filling out the form could not be considered voluntary and unambiguous and the processing lacked a specific purpose. Many fields were mandatory and the purpose of processing was only vaguely described. The court also found that the processing was not necessary for pre-contractual measures under Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, as it was not indispensable to initiate rental negotiations. Similarly, the Court rejected that there was a le
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband - Germany (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: