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

CJEU case C‑414/24 Datenschutzbehörde (Articulation des recours) – CJEU Judgment (Austria, 2025)

CJEU Judgment
Court of Justice of the European Union4 September 2025Austria
final
CJEU Judgment

CJEU judgment — not a DPA enforcement action

This is a Court of Justice ruling, not an enforcement action by a data protection authority. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

The Court of Justice of the European Union clarified that a person can file complaints about data protection violations even if they have also taken their case to court. This ruling is significant because it ensures that individuals have multiple avenues to seek justice regarding their personal data. It helps protect users' rights under GDPR.

What happened

The Court ruled that individuals can pursue complaints with data protection authorities even if they have ongoing legal actions against data controllers.

Who was affected

Individuals who have had their data protection rights violated and are seeking remedies through both courts and data protection authorities.

What the authority found

The Court held that the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority is independent of the right to a judicial remedy.

Why this matters

This decision emphasizes the importance of user rights in data protection and ensures that individuals can seek help from multiple sources, reinforcing the protections under GDPR.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
View original scraped data
Art. 77(1) GDPR
Art. 78(1) GDPR
Art. 79(1) GDPR

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

Decision AuthorityCJEU
Reviewed AuthorityVwGH (Austria)

Source checks

Secondary-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 18 March 2026.

No issues were reported by that automated check.

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

In 2017 (before the GDPR entered into force), a data subject requested an online physician search platform (the controller) to erase their data. The controller refused, and the data subject brought a claim before a civil court. The data subject requested the controller to erase their data again after the GDPR had entered into force. This request was refused, and the data subject filed a complaint with the Austrian DPA. The DPA dismissed the complaint, on the grounds that they had previously brought the same matter before a court. According to the DPA, filing parallel or consecutive claims with a supervisory authority and a court was incompatible with the remedial mechanism under the GDPR. At the time, the civil court had not reached a final decision. The data subject appealed the decision to the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, or BVwG), who dismissed the appeal. The BVwG stated that the one-year limitation period under Austrian law had passed, and therefore, the data subject did not have the right to file a complaint with the DPA. The fact that the GDPR had entered into force did not interrupt the limitation period. Both the data subject and the DPA appealed the decision of the Court to the Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof, or VwGH). The VwGH disagreed with the reasoning of the BVwG; the limitation period only started after the controller rejected the data subject’s second erasure request, after the GDPR had entered into force. The VwGH stayed proceedings and requested a preliminary ruling from the CJEU. The question was based on the Case C-132/21, in which the CJEU held that the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority (Articles 77(1) and 78(1) GDPR) may be exercised independently from the right to a judicial remedy against a controller or processor (Article 79(1) GDPR). The VwGH requested the CJEU to clarify the relationship between the remedies, and specifically, whether a DPA can reject a complaint

Outcome

CJEU Case

A judgment or Advocate General opinion in a case before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for CJEU case C‑414/24 Datenschutzbehörde (Articulation des recours) in AT

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

Details

Judgment Date

4 September 2025

Authority

Court of Justice of the European Union

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. CJEU case C‑414/24 Datenschutzbehörde (Articulation des recours) - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: