Search results

DSGVO BDSG, Article 21 GDPR, margin number 13 (C.H. Beck 2019, 3rd Edition). LG Hamburg, 23 July 2020, 334 O 161/19 (available here). Herbst, in Kühling,

IP address in particular can serve as a person-specific characteristic (cf. LG München I, judgement of 20.1.2022 - 3 O 17493/20) and can be used for identification

The Regional Court Berlin (Landgericht Berlin - LG Berlin) overturned the decision of the DPA of Berlin, to fine Deutsche Wohnen SE €14,500,000 for violating

perception of third-party financial interests (see LG Wuppertal, judgment of July 29, 2021, 4 O 409/20; LG Aurich, Judgment of June 8th, 2021, 3 O 1279/20)

the German original. Please refer to the German original for more details. LG Magdeburg, judgment of May 24th, 2022 - 9 O 1571/20 Source openJur 2023, 6512

does not therefore apply (also LG Essen ruling of November 10, 2022 - 6 O 111/22, GRUR-RS 2022, 34818 marginal number 38; LG Paderborn, judgment of December

159/82 -, NJW 1984, 436; LG Frankfurt a.M. loc. cit.; LG Aschaffenburg, Judgment of 7 October 2020 - 15 O 46/20 - ZD 2021, 214; LG Heilbronn, Judgment of

would not be possible to check the formal legality (cf. LG Wuppertal, r+s 2021, 696 para. 24; LG Detmold, BeckRS 2021, 34230 para. 24). 19 bb) The subsequent

Regulation, as well as the articles 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree lg. 1 September 2011, no. 150, opposition to this provision may be lodged with

Deutsche Wohnen European Case Law Identifier: n/a Appeal: Appealed - Confirmed LG Berlin (Germany) Original Language(s): English Original Source: Curia (in

matters have to be filed with one of the 16 Regional Court (Landesgericht - LG) instead of the district courts (Bezirksgericht - BG). Under national procedural

GDPR and awarded € 800 in emotional damages. The case is under appeal. See LG Feldkirch - 57 Cg 30/19b - 15. Share blogs or news articles here! The decision

LG Gießen (Germany) - 2 O 186/22 Court: LG Gießen (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 15 GDPR § 242 BGB § 254 ZPO § 3 VVG Decided: 08

LG Wiesbaden - 10 O 14/21 Court: LG Wiesbaden (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 4(11) GDPR Article 6(1) GDPR Article 26 GDPR Article

court. Based on comparable decisions (including LG Neuruppin, decision of October 4th, 2021 - 2 O 157/22; LG Aschaffenburg, judgment of October 7th, 2020

example in recital 75). In this regard, the Court considered the judgement of LG Essen, judgement of 23.9.2021 - 6 O 190/21, and held that in this case, there

(BeckOK DatenschutzR / Quaas, 32. Ed. 1.2.2020, DS-GVO Art. 82 Rn. 31) (see LG Cologne, judgment of 07.10.2020 - 28 O 71 / 20). The obligation to reimburse

filed a lawsuit with the Regional Court of Leipzig (Landgericht Leipzig - LG Leipzig) requesting the refund of overpaid premiums as well as information

LG Bonn - 29 OWi 1/20 Court: LG Bonn (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 32(1) GDPR Article 32(2) GDPR Article 83(1) GDPR Article 83(2)

Austrian Regional Court ("LG Feldkirch") finds that generating information about political affiliation by the Austrian Postal service without a legal basis

Regulation, as well as the articles 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree lg. 1 September 2011, no. 150, opposition to this provision may be lodged with

Number/Name: BGH VI ZR 405/18 European Case Law Identifier: Appeal from: LG Frankfurt (Germany) LG Frankfurt am Main 2-03 O 190/16 Appeal to: Appealed - Overturned

initiated an action for injunction before Regional Court, Berlin (Landgericht (LG) Berlin) in Germany claiming that the information provided by the games in

the decisive fact rp p re se n ta to d e d o ct in co n o scib ility of a lg o rhythm u used for a sse g n a tio n for the p u n te g g io d i ra tin g

The access restriction shall be valid until: 13.07.2097 35 lg 1 p 1235(1)12 of the AvTS § 35 lg 1 p 3, AvTS § Notice of termination of Termination of proceedings

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights must also be taken into account (see also LG Wuppertal, judgment of 29.3.2019 - 17 O 178/18, BeckRS 2019, 13062), but this

court of first instance, the Regional Court of Aachen (Landgericht Aachen – LG Aachen), ruled in favour of the data subject. The controller appealed this

Regulation, as well as the articles 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree lg. 1 September 2011, no. 150, opposition to this provision may be lodged with

must at least be perceptible, irrespective of a materiality threshold (cf. LG Bonn, judgment of 01.07.2021 - 15 O 355/20 - juris). Otherwise, damage is

Regulation, as well as the articles 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree lg. 1 September 2011, no. 150, opposition to this provision may be lodged with

Regulation, as well as the articles 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree lg. 1 September 2011, no. 150, opposition to this provision may be lodged with

order and damages. The Regional Court of Darmstadt (Landgericht Darmstadt - LG Darmstadt) ordered the controller to cease-and-desist and to pay €1000 in

a culpable breach is to be assumed (cf. LG Karlsruhe, judgment of 02.08.2019 - 8 O 26/19, ZD 2019, 511, 512; LG Frankfurt a.M., Judgment of 18.01.2021 -

of the case by the by the LG Feldkirch. Also, he argued that substantial facts of the case had not been established by the LG Feldkirch and that he should

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights must also be taken into account (see also LG Wuppertal, Urt. v. 29.03.2019 - 17 O 178/18, BeckRS 2019, 13062), but this

personal data, settlement of the legal dispute, personal information Lower court: LG Munich I, final judgment of April 6th, 2020 - 3 O 909/19 Further information:

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:DE:OLGHB:2021:0716.1W18.21.00 Appeal from: LG Bremen (Germany) Appeal to: Original Language(s): German Original Source:

requests by the data subject. The first instance court (Regional Court Wels - LG Wels) rejected the lawsuit, holding that the controller had already fulfilled

data subject requested the Regional Court of Hamburg (Landgericht Hamburg – LG Hamburg) to order the controller to provide access to the information at issue

LG Berlin - 93 O 167/20 Court: LG Berlin (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 6(1)(f) GDPR Article 13 GDPR Article 80(2) GDPR § 25 TTDSG

not blocked by Art. 79 GDPR (see also LG Frankfurt a.M., Judgement v. 13.09.2018 - 2-03 O 283/18, ZD 2018, 587; LG Darmstadt, judgement of 26.05.2020 –

LG Lübeck - 15 O 74/22 Court: LG Lübeck (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 82 GDPR Decided: 25.05.2023 Published: Parties: National

warning letter, the plaintiff brought an action before the LG Berlin under Article 79(2) GDPR. The LG held the action to be partially inadmissible, as the court

appropriate (following LG Regensburg, judgment of 11.05. 2023 - 72 O 731/22; OLG Stuttgart, decision of 03.01.2023 - 4 AR 4/22; LG Stuttgart and LG Ellwangen each

Article 82 GDPR, paragraph 12 f; Spittka, GRUR-Prax 2019, 475; LG Darmstadt, ZE 2020, 642; LG Frankfurt, ZE 2020, 639; restrictively Wytibul, NJW 2019, 3265)

LG Würzburg - 11 O 1741/18 UWG Court: LG Würzburg (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 13 GDPR § 3 a UWG § 4 (11) UWG § 8 (3) UWG § 12

The Regional Court of Cologne (LG Köln) held that a search engine is not allowed to show search results if the linked website contains untrue factual claims

website by its operator. The Regional Court of Munich (Landgericht München - LG München) held that the transfer to Google via Google Fonts violated the GDPR

LG Wiesbaden - 3 S 50/21 Court: LG Wiesbaden (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 2(2) GDPR Article 4(8) GDPR Article 15 GDPR Article

LG Gießen - 5 O 195/22 Court: LG Gießen (Germany) Jurisdiction: Germany Relevant Law: Article 82(1) GDPR Decided: 03.11.2022 Published: Parties: National