Search results

The Court of First Instance of the Central Netherlands ruled on the appeal against a decision by the Dutch Data Protection Authority regarding processing

The Court of First Instance of the Central Netherlands ruled that voice fragment is (biometric) personal data but in this case it was used in the context

The District Court of Midden-Nederland (Rb. Midden-Nederland) ruled that the right to rectification of inaccuracies contained in a medical report cannot

case before the court. The District Court of Midden-Nederland (Rechtbank Midden-Nederland - Rb. Midden-Nederland) heard the case. The Court stated that the

The District Court of Central Netherlands held that VoetbalTV doesn’t have to pay a fine issued by the Dutch DPA. The court did not agree with the restrictive

The Court of First Instance of the Central Netherlands submitted preliminary questions to the CJEU on the interpretation of Article 55(3) GDPR. The questions

original. Please refer to the Dutch original for more details. COURT CENTRAL NETHERLANDS Civil rights Chamber of Commerce location Utrecht case number / application

The biggest internet service provider in the Netherlands (Ziggo) is not obliged to send a warning letter to its customer(s) on behalf of Stichting BREIN

The Court of First Instance of the Central Netherlands found that the personal data of a claimant's child was illegally shared with the Dutch tax office

The District Court Midden-Nederland ruled in an interlocutory injunction that a copyright watchdog could not force an internet service provider to forward

the judgment of the Interim Injunction Judge in the District Court of Midden-Nederland of 20 February 2019; orders [the appellant] to pay the costs of the

to cooperate voluntarily. Therefore, Brein filed a submission at the Midden-Nederland Court of First Instance (Rechtbank) to force Ziggo to send the warning

2019 rendered by the Interim Injunction Judge in the District Court of Midden-Nederland, location Utrecht. 2. The appeal proceedings 2.1 The course of the

residing at [residence], against the judgment of the District Court of Midden-Nederland of 31 January 2019 in Case No 18/1037 in the proceedings between: [appellants]

department, trade case number court of appeal 200.307.830 (case number Central Netherlands court, location Utrecht, 9485684) decision of 5 July 2022 in the case

Authority (hereinafter: the AP), appellant, against the judgment of the Midden-Nederland District Court of 23 November 2020 in case no. 20/2315 in the proceedings

declare the complaint inadmissible. In June 2020, the District Court of Midden-Nederland ruled on the appeal. The District Court reversed the BFT's January

District Court of Midden-Nederland already expressed an opinion on the subject in the VoetbalTV case. Here, the Court (Midden-Nederland) held that not only

July 2019 of the Interim Injunction Judge of the District Court of Midden-Nederland it was ruled that the delivery in question as such does not have to

behalf. Moreover, the Court referred to the reasoning of the Court of Midden-Nederland in its judgement of 15 October 2020, regarding the question within