Court case Az. IX B 72/25 – 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.
A German court ruled that a person’s request for access to their data from a court administration was not handled correctly. The court found that the financial courts do not have jurisdiction over such requests, which must go through administrative courts instead. This ruling clarifies the proper channels for individuals seeking access to their personal data.
What happened
A person filed a complaint because they believed their access request to a court administration was incomplete and not addressed in time.
Who was affected
The individual who submitted an access request to the Financial Court Berlin-Brandenburg.
What the authority found
The court held that the financial courts do not have jurisdiction over access requests under GDPR, confirming that these should be directed to administrative courts.
Why this matters
This ruling clarifies the legal pathways for individuals seeking access to their data from public bodies. It serves as a reminder for businesses and users to understand the correct procedures for data access requests.
GDPR Articles Cited
View original scraped data
Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.
A data subject submitted an access request under Article 15 GDPR to the court administration of the Financial Court Berlin-Brandenburg (Finanzgericht Berlin-Brandenburg - FG). The data subject considered the response incomplete. Subsequently, they filed a complaint with the Brandenburg State Commissioner for Data Protection (Landesbeauftragter für den Datenschutz Brandenburg) under Article 77 GDPR but did not receive a reply within three months. The data subject then brought an action for inaction under Article 78(2) GDPR against the supervisory authority. They requested that the authority order the court administration to answer their access request immediately and completely. The Financial Court referred the dispute to the local Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht - VG), stating that the German Fiscal Code gives financial courts jurisdiction only for GDPR disputes concerning tax authorities and tax matters. The data subject challenged this referral, arguing that the court administration is a public body, its data processing occurs in a tax context, and the financial courts were therefore competent. The Bundesfinanzhof (BFH) rejected the complaint. It held that a request under Article 15 GDPR to a court administration does not involve processing by a tax authority and is not a tax matter. The granting or refusal of access by a court administration constitutes general administrative activity, not judicial activity. Therefore, the German Fiscal Code does not grant financial courts jurisdiction. The BFH confirmed that the correct legal route for an inaction complaint under Article 78(2) GDPR in this context is through the administrative courts. The referral by the Financial Court to the local Administrative Court was lawful. The data subject’s appeal against the referral was dismissed, and the costs were to be borne by the data subject.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case Az. IX B 72/25 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case Az. IX B 72/25 - Germany (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: