LG Berlin - 93 O 167/20

From GDPRhub
LG Berlin - 93 O 167/20
Courts logo1.png
Court: LG Berlin (Germany)
Jurisdiction: Germany
Relevant Law: Article 6(1)(f) GDPR
Article 13 GDPR
Article 80(2) GDPR
§ 25 TTDSG
Decided: 15.06.2023
National Case Number/Name: 93 O 167/20
European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:DE:LGBE:2023:0615.93O167.20.00
Appeal from:
Appeal to: Unknown
Original Language(s): German
Original Source: gesetze.berlin.de (in German)
Initial Contributor: n/a

The Regional Court of Berlin held that the implemention of technologies such as Cookies on telemedia for marketing purposes which allow the behavior of users to be tracked across different platforms is unlawful without consent.

English Summary


Plaintiff is the umbrella organization of the consumer advice centers in Germany. Defendant is a media company.

The media company integrated about 18 third-party-cookies on its website like Double Click from Google. They relied this on Art. 6 (1) (f) GDPR. The company did not implement any information about that on their start page and linked to the privacy policy not before implementing and analyzing the cookies. These cookies enabled profiling via tracking across different platforms.

The plaintiff sent a warning on 20 June 2019 which the defendant declined on 14 August 2019.

The defendant implented in August 2019 an opt-in cookie banner and changed their privacy policy.

The plaintiff is of the opinion that there is no legitimate interest of the defendant and neither the weighting up would turn out in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff criticizes the insufficient information and continues that the incorrect legal basis leads to the false imagination that it is allowed to implement cookies without consent.

The defendant is of the opinion that it is necessary because they otherwise would not be able to implement their offers on their website free of cost and also the cookies were set by third parties.


The court is of the opinion that browser settings allowing a transfer of data are no active consent for lack of a deliberate decision of the affected persons. Further the court held that the setting of cookies from third parties is attributable to the defendant as they were payed for that. The court does not follow the opinion of the defendant that the freedom of press includes the advertisement as there is a certain part of jounralistic work needed for Art. 85 GDPR.


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 German original. Please refer to the German original for more details.