ADA (Lithuania) - 2024-02-23
| ADA - 2024-02-23 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Authority: | ADA (Lithuania) |
| Jurisdiction: | Lithuania |
| Relevant Law: | Article 6(1)(b) GDPR Article 6(1)(f) GDPR Article 21(1) GDPR |
| Type: | Complaint |
| Outcome: | Upheld |
| Started: | |
| Decided: | 23.02.2024 |
| Published: | 08.06.2024 |
| Fine: | n/a |
| Parties: | Customer (applicant) |
| National Case Number/Name: | 2024-02-23 |
| European Case Law Identifier: | n/a |
| Appeal: | n/a |
| Original Language(s): | Lithuanian |
| Original Source: | ADA (Valstybinė duomenų apsaugos inspekcija - VDAI) (in LT) |
| Initial Contributor: | Alexander Shpiliauskas |
An electronic communications service provider was reprimanded for a failure to honor the data subject's right to object to receiving bill payment reminders, even though the data subject consistently made timely payments.
English Summary
Facts
A provider of electronic communications services ('controller) was providing services to a customer ('data subject') under a contract.
The data subject filed a complaint with the DPA and stated that he received the controller's bill payment reminders, which are sent to the applicant's email address on monthly basis, although the data subject paid the bills for services on time. The data subject indicated and provided evidence that he had repeatedly asked the controller not to send these reminders. Additionally, he was not provided any alternative to opt-out from receiving the unwanted emails.
The controller indicated that reminders were sent to the data subject due to the necessity to perform the contract in accordance with Article 6(1)(b) GDPR. Additionally, the controller presented arguments regarding the possibility of applying a legitimate interest condition as per Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, emphasizing data controller’s interest in receiving payment for services on time.
The DPA found that:
(i) none of the documents submitted by the controller to the DPA stipulate that the reminders were sent, if data subject did not pay the bill by a certain date;
(ii) the controller admitted that the data subject had always paid the bills by the dates specified in the controller's documents and reminders;
(iii) the controller did not provide any evidence that the data subject breached the payment conditions established by the contract.
Holding
The DPA held that the controller could not justify the processing of the data subject data based on Article 6(1)(b) GDPR. Based on the DPAI, the processing the data subject's email address for the purpose of sending reminders was not necessary in order to fulfill the contract concluded with the data subject.
Furthermore, it was held that processing based on the controller's legitimate interest under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR is possible, however the controller must prove, in each case of refusal to honor an objection, that the reasons for processing outweigh the data subject's interests, rights, and freedoms.
As a result, the controller's refusal to implement the data subject's right to object with the processing their e-mail address constituted a violation of Article 21(1) GDPR.
Therefore, the data subject's complaint was accepted and the controller received instructions to satisfy the data subject's request to implement the right to object with the processing of their email address for sending payment reminders.
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
English Machine Translation of the Decision
The decision below is a machine translation of the Lithuanian original. Please refer to the Lithuanian original for more details.
