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

Court case W137 2311069-1 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA BVwG28 August 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.

An Indian national's request to delete their entry from the Schengen Information System was denied by the Austrian authorities. The court ruled that the entry was lawful and could not be erased because it was tied to a valid return decision. This case illustrates the complexities of data rights when it comes to legal obligations.

What happened

The Austrian court upheld the decision to keep the Indian national's data in the Schengen Information System.

Who was affected

An Indian national who sought to have their data removed from the Schengen Information System.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the data processing was lawful and the right to erasure did not apply due to legal obligations.

Why this matters

This case shows that legal obligations can override individual data rights. It serves as a reminder for companies to understand the legal frameworks surrounding data processing.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 6 GDPR
Art. 9 GDPR
Art. 17 GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 6(GDPR)
Art. 9(GDPR)
Art. 17(GDPR)

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

Decision AuthorityBVwG

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 23 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified.

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

A national of India, the data subject, lodged an application for international protection with the responsible Austrian authority, the controller, which was dismissed and a return decision was issued. Consequently, the data subject’s data was entered into the Schengen Information System (SIS), a system used to track return decisions for third-country nationals unlawfully staying in the EU. The data subject remained in the Schengen area and did not leave. Furthermore, he requested that the Austrian authorities delete his SIS entry, claiming that Portugal had promised him a residence and work permit if the SIS entry was removed. The controller refused to delete the SIS record because the return decision was still valid, the data subject had not left the EU and Portugal had not officially notified Austria of any residence permit grant or consultation as required. The data subject further lodged a complaint with the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSB) for an alleged violation in the right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR. The DSB dismissed the complaint, finding the SIS data processing lawful. Then, the data subject appealed the decision to the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG). The appeal was dismissed as unfounded. The court held that the SIS entry was lawful under the relevant legislation and there was no legal ground for deletion. Moreover, the right to erasure did not apply, because the SIS processing was required to fulfill a legal obligation under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR and was performed in the exercise of official authority under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, falling under the exception of Article 17(3)(b) GDPR. The court also clarified that the processing also met the exception under Article 9(2)(g) GDPR for sensitive data.

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 2311069-1 in AT

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

Details

Ruling Date

28 August 2025

Authority

DPA BVwG

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 W137 2311069-1 - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: