TIKTOK TECHNOLOGY LIMITED – Court Ruling (Ireland, 2025)

Court Ruling
Data Protection Commission13 November 2025Ireland
final
Court Ruling

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.

TikTok challenged a decision and related suspension order issued by the Irish DPA concerning transfers of EEA user data to China under Article 46 GDPR. In the decision, the DPA found that TikTok had infringed Article 46(1) GDPR by failing to ensure that personal data of EEA users transferred outside the EEA (specifically through remote access by personnel in China) received a level of protection essentially equivalent to that available within the EU during the relevant period. The DPA also found a breach of Article 13(1)(f) GDPR for failure to provide required information about such data transfers to data subjects. Consequently, the DPA imposed administrative fines totalling €530 million, a suspension order requiring TikTok to suspend the data transfers, and a corrective order requiring TikTok to bring its processing operations into compliance. TikTok initiated an appeal against the DPA decision. The appeal automatically stayed the obligation to pay the administrative fines, but it did not stay the suspension order or corrective order. TikTok applied for a stay of those orders, asserting that compliance would require billions of euros in expenditure, significant business disruption, and harm to stakeholders’ experience, and that such losses could not be remedied if TikTok ultimately succeeded on appeal. The DPA opposed the stay, asserting that the ongoing data transfers posed risks to the fundamental rights of TikTok’s 159 million monthly EEA users. The Court held that the appropriate legal standard for deciding whether to grant a stay should be decided according to the national procedural rules (Okunade test), rather than the harmonized EU ones (Zuckerfabrik test). Under the Okunade test, the Court must identify the course of action carrying the least risk of injustice pending the appeal. As the DPA accepted that TikTok’s appeal raised a serious issue to be tried, the Court focused on whether damages would be an adequate remedy and where the balance of justi

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 46(GDPR)
Art. 60(GDPR)
Art. 13(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 46(1) GDPR
Decision AuthorityHigh Court
Reviewed AuthorityDPC (Ireland)
Full Legal Summary

TikTok challenged a decision and related suspension order issued by the Irish DPA concerning transfers of EEA user data to China under Article 46 GDPR. In the decision, the DPA found that TikTok had infringed Article 46(1) GDPR by failing to ensure that personal data of EEA users transferred outside the EEA (specifically through remote access by personnel in China) received a level of protection essentially equivalent to that available within the EU during the relevant period. The DPA also found a breach of Article 13(1)(f) GDPR for failure to provide required information about such data transfers to data subjects. Consequently, the DPA imposed administrative fines totalling €530 million, a suspension order requiring TikTok to suspend the data transfers, and a corrective order requiring TikTok to bring its processing operations into compliance. TikTok initiated an appeal against the DPA decision. The appeal automatically stayed the obligation to pay the administrative fines, but it did not stay the suspension order or corrective order. TikTok applied for a stay of those orders, asserting that compliance would require billions of euros in expenditure, significant business disruption, and harm to stakeholders’ experience, and that such losses could not be remedied if TikTok ultimately succeeded on appeal. The DPA opposed the stay, asserting that the ongoing data transfers posed risks to the fundamental rights of TikTok’s 159 million monthly EEA users. The Court held that the appropriate legal standard for deciding whether to grant a stay should be decided according to the national procedural rules (Okunade test), rather than the harmonized EU ones (Zuckerfabrik test). Under the Okunade test, the Court must identify the course of action carrying the least risk of injustice pending the appeal. As the DPA accepted that TikTok’s appeal raised a serious issue to be tried, the Court focused on whether damages would be an adequate remedy and where the balance of justi

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for TIKTOK TECHNOLOGY LIMITED in IE

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

Details

Ruling Date

13 November 2025

Authority

Data Protection Commission

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. TIKTOK TECHNOLOGY LIMITED - Ireland (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: