Difference between revisions of "Datatilsynet (Denmark) - 2021-431-0125"

From GDPRhub
 
Line 50: Line 50:
 
}}
 
}}
  
The Danish DPA criticised a company for their website's cookie consent form. The pop up boxes on the website were designed to make it more difficult to reject the use of cookies than to accept such use.
+
The Danish DPA ruled that a company had failed to obtain the valid consent of data subjects for the placing of cookies because the pop-up cookie banner on the website was designed to make it more difficult to reject the use of cookies than to accept such use.
  
 
== English Summary ==
 
== English Summary ==
  
 
=== Facts ===
 
=== Facts ===
A data subject had made a complaint regarding the controller's use of cookies on their website. The controller had relied on consent as a legal basis. The controller had first requested consent through a pop up box stating that the website used cookies. The pop up box contained two hyperlinks labeled "Read more about cookies" and "Close". During the DPA's investigation, the controller had introduced a new method of requesting consent. The controller's second solution included more information about the processing, as well as the option to opt out of processing for specific purposes from a list. With the new solution, the user had the choice between two hyperlinks labeled "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept". The Danish DPA assessed both the first and the second consent request solution.
+
A data subject filed a complaint with the Danish DPA regarding the controller's use of cookies on their website. The controller had relied on consent as a legal basis. The controller had first requested consent through a pop up box stating that the website used cookies. The pop up box contained two hyperlinks labeled "Read more about cookies" and "Close". During the DPA's investigation, the controller had introduced a new method of requesting consent. The controller's second solution included more information about the processing, as well as the option to opt out of processing for specific purposes from a list. With the new solution, the user had the choice between two hyperlinks labeled "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept". The Danish DPA assessed both the first and the second consent request solution.
  
 
=== Holding ===
 
=== Holding ===
  
 
==== Solution 1: alternatives "Read more about cookies" and "Close": ====
 
==== Solution 1: alternatives "Read more about cookies" and "Close": ====
The DPA held that the controller had not obtained legal basis for the use of cookies when the first solution was practised cf. [[:Category:Article 6(1) GDPR|Article 6(1) GDPR]]. The data subject did not have the option to consent to processing for particular purposes. More importantly, the controller offered no opt-out solution for the use of cookies. The data subject therefore had no choice in the matter when visiting the website. As a consequence, the DPA issued severe criticism of the processing activities.
+
The DPA held that the controller could not obtained a valid consent under [[:Category:Article 6(1) GDPR|Article 6(1)(a) GDPR]] for the use of cookies when the first solution was used. The data subject did not have the option to consent to processing for particular purposes. More importantly, the controller offered no opt-out solution for the use of cookies. The data subject therefore had no choice in the matter when visiting the website. As a consequence, the DPA expressed severe criticism about the processing activities based on this cookie banner.
  
 
==== Solution 2: alternatives "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept": ====
 
==== Solution 2: alternatives "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept": ====
The DPA then had to assess whether the amendments made to the methods for obtaining consent were sufficient. The DPA held that although the data subject now had the possibility to reject all cookies, the website had been designed in a way that ushered the data subject to click the "ACCEPT ALL" box. It had been easier for the data subject to consent to the use of cookies than to reject such use. The DPA therefore issued criticism of the second solution.  
+
The DPA then had to assess whether the changes made to the cookie banner were sufficient to obtain the valid consent of data subjects. The DPA held that although the data subjects now had the possibility to reject all cookies, the cookie banner had been designed in a way that nudged the data subject towards clicking on the "ACCEPT ALL" button. It was easier for the data subjects to consent to the use of cookies than to reject such use. The DPA therefore also expressed criticism about the second solution. Lastly, the DPA also criticized the processing activities after the second solution was implemented because the cookie tracking actually began before obtaining the data subject's consent (i.e. before the data subject even clicked on the "Accept" or "ACCEPT ALL" button).  
 
 
Lastly, the DPA also issued severed criticism of the processing activities after the second solution was implemented because the cookie tracking began before obtaining the data subject's consent. The website's cookies were applied to every visitor from the moment they accessed the website.  
 
  
 
== Comment ==
 
== Comment ==

Latest revision as of 08:11, 27 October 2021

Datatilsynet (Denmark) - 2021-431-0125
LogoDK.png
Authority: Datatilsynet (Denmark)
Jurisdiction: Denmark
Relevant Law: Article 4(11) GDPR
Article 6(1)(a) GDPR
Type: Complaint
Outcome: Upheld
Started:
Decided: 20.10.2021
Published:
Fine: None
Parties: Alstrøm – Din Isenkræmmer ApS
National Case Number/Name: 2021-431-0125
European Case Law Identifier: n/a
Appeal: Unknown
Original Language(s): Danish
Original Source: Datatilsynet (in DA)
Initial Contributor: n/a

The Danish DPA ruled that a company had failed to obtain the valid consent of data subjects for the placing of cookies because the pop-up cookie banner on the website was designed to make it more difficult to reject the use of cookies than to accept such use.

English Summary[edit | edit source]

Facts[edit | edit source]

A data subject filed a complaint with the Danish DPA regarding the controller's use of cookies on their website. The controller had relied on consent as a legal basis. The controller had first requested consent through a pop up box stating that the website used cookies. The pop up box contained two hyperlinks labeled "Read more about cookies" and "Close". During the DPA's investigation, the controller had introduced a new method of requesting consent. The controller's second solution included more information about the processing, as well as the option to opt out of processing for specific purposes from a list. With the new solution, the user had the choice between two hyperlinks labeled "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept". The Danish DPA assessed both the first and the second consent request solution.

Holding[edit | edit source]

Solution 1: alternatives "Read more about cookies" and "Close":[edit | edit source]

The DPA held that the controller could not obtained a valid consent under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR for the use of cookies when the first solution was used. The data subject did not have the option to consent to processing for particular purposes. More importantly, the controller offered no opt-out solution for the use of cookies. The data subject therefore had no choice in the matter when visiting the website. As a consequence, the DPA expressed severe criticism about the processing activities based on this cookie banner.

Solution 2: alternatives "ACCEPT ALL" and "Accept":[edit | edit source]

The DPA then had to assess whether the changes made to the cookie banner were sufficient to obtain the valid consent of data subjects. The DPA held that although the data subjects now had the possibility to reject all cookies, the cookie banner had been designed in a way that nudged the data subject towards clicking on the "ACCEPT ALL" button. It was easier for the data subjects to consent to the use of cookies than to reject such use. The DPA therefore also expressed criticism about the second solution. Lastly, the DPA also criticized the processing activities after the second solution was implemented because the cookie tracking actually began before obtaining the data subject's consent (i.e. before the data subject even clicked on the "Accept" or "ACCEPT ALL" button).

Comment[edit | edit source]

Share your comments here!

Further Resources[edit | edit source]

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision[edit | edit source]

The decision below is a machine translation of the Danish original. Please refer to the Danish original for more details.