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

AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik – CJEU Judgment (Sweden, 2025)

CJEU Judgment
Court of Justice of the European Union18 December 2025Sweden
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 ruled on the use of body-worn cameras by AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik. The court found that the company did not provide adequate information to the public about how their data was being collected, which is crucial for protecting people's privacy.

What happened

AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik used body-worn cameras for ticket inspectors but failed to inform people properly about data collection.

Who was affected

Passengers and the public who were recorded by the body-worn cameras used by ticket inspectors.

What the authority found

The court determined that AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik violated GDPR by not fulfilling its obligation to inform individuals about data collection.

Why this matters

This ruling emphasizes the need for companies to be transparent about data collection practices, especially when using surveillance technology. It serves as a reminder for public service providers to comply with privacy laws.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 5 GDPR
Art. 12 GDPR
Art. 13 GDPR
Art. 14 GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 5(GDPR)
Art. 12(GDPR)
Art. 13(GDPR)
Art. 14(GDPR)

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

Decision AuthorityCJEU
Reviewed AuthorityHd (Sweden)

Source checks

Secondary-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 21 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, authority 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

AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik (the controller), the operator of public transport in Stockholm, equipped its ticket inspectors with body-worn cameras that continuously recorded video and audio during inspections. The cameras had a short circular memory, automatically overwriting footage unless inspectors saved it when issuing fines or facing threats. The stated purposes of the cameras were to prevent and document violence against inspectors and to verify the identity of fined passengers. Following a supervisory investigation, the Swedish Data Protection Authority found that the controller had infringed several provisions of the GDPR, including the obligation to provide information to data subjects. The Authority imposed an administrative fine in total SEK 16,000,000 (€1,420,670) of which SEK 4,000,000 (€355,188) was for failure to provide information to the data subjects. The controller challenged the Swedish DPA’s decision before the Administrative court of first instance (Förvaltningsrätten i Stockholm), which upheld the fine. The controller then appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal (Kammarrätten i Stockholm), which annulled the fine, holding that Article 13 GDPR was not applicable. The Swedish DPA subsequently appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden (Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen). The referring court identified the key issue as whether Article 13 GDPR or Article 14 GDPR applies to personal data collected by body-worn cameras. Resolving this question was necessary to determine the content, timing, and possible exceptions of the information obligation and to assess whether the Authority was entitled to impose an administrative fine for non-compliance with Article 13 GDPR. The court also noted uncertainty regarding the legal weight of the [https://www.edpb.europa.eu/about-edpb/who-we-are/legacy-art-29-working-party_en Article 29 Working Party’s Guidelines] on transparency, which provide that Article 13 GDPR applies to video surveillance. In

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 AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik in SE

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

Details

Judgment Date

18 December 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. AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik - Sweden (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: