Enforcing jurisdiction
Austria · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation

Court case Ro 2023/04/0045 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA VwGH29 September 2025Austria
final
Court Ruling

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.

Austria's Supreme Administrative Court upheld a decision against a loyalty program operator for failing to obtain valid consent for profiling users. The court found that the consent process was not clear and bundled with other agreements. This ruling emphasizes the need for clear and separate consent for data processing.

What happened

The loyalty program operator was found to have invalid consent for profiling users' purchasing behavior.

Who was affected

Customers participating in the loyalty program who were subjected to profiling without valid consent.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the consent obtained for profiling did not meet GDPR standards, making the processing unlawful.

Why this matters

This case stresses the importance of obtaining clear and separate consent for data processing activities. Businesses must ensure their consent mechanisms are compliant with GDPR to avoid legal issues.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 4 GDPR
Art. 6 GDPR
Art. 7 GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(GDPR)
Art. 6(GDPR)
Art. 7(GDPR)

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

Decision AuthorityVwGH

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 23 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles 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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The operator of a loyalty program (the controller) provided customers (the data subjects) with the option to collect points in order to receive discounts. During registration, data subjects were asked to consent to their data being used for profiling. Having consent under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR as the legal basis, the controller performed automated analyses of purchasing behavior to personalize advertising. The Austrian DPA (DSB) initiated an ex-officio investigation, conducted an on-site inspection and found that the consent for profiling did not meet GDPR standards under Articles 4(11) and 7 GDPR. The information about profiling was not clearly visible or easy to understand, and the consent was bundled with registration and acceptance of terms instead of being given separately. The DSB declared the processing regarding profiling unlawful since there was no valid consent or other legal basis. The controller was ordered to stop processing data for profiling purposes until it had a valid legal basis and was granted a six-month period for compliance. The controller appealed to the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG), which upheld the appeal and overturned the DSB’s decision. The DSB then appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court (VwGH), which partially overturned the BVwG’s ruling, siding in part with the DSB. The case returned to the BVwG, which rejected the controller’s appeal but modified parts of the DSB’s decision. The controller subsequently appealed against this BVwG decision to the VwGH. The VwGH rejected the controller’s appeal and upheld the BVwG’s decision regarding the prohibition on profiling, confirming that the prohibition was not disproportionate. It only applied to unlawful profiling and did not affect any future processing based on valid consent. The court held that consent was invalid under Article 4 and Article 7 GDPR, because there was bundled with registration and acceptance of terms and the privacy policy, the visual design did not make the

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case Ro 2023/04/0045 in AT

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

Details

Ruling Date

29 September 2025

Authority

DPA VwGH

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Automatically normalized and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case Ro 2023/04/0045 - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: