Tag: Marketing

Posted on

publishable_uk_2019-08_right_to_erasure_not_granted_summarypublic.pdf

Summary Final Decision Art 60
Complaint

Infringement of the GDPR

Background information
Date of final Decision 7 August 2019

LSA: UK
CSAs: AT

Legal Reference: Right to erasure (Article 17)

Decision: Violation identified; No regulatory action.

Key words: Right to erasure, Marketing

Summary of the Decision

Origin of the case
The complainant stated that he asked the controller not to send him marketing emails, yet he continued to receive them.

Findings
The UK SA found that the controller did not comply with its data protection obligations.
The controller stated that the complainant send his request to unsubscribe to a ‘no-reply’ email address, instead of using the ‘unsubscribe’ button. However, the email address was not clearly recognisable as a ‘no-reply’ email address.

Decision
The UK SA took note of the actions taken by the controller, including a change to its processes so that the email address from which marketing communications are sent is now monitored. No regulatory action was taken.

—
This text has been converted automatically from the PDF available via
https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/consistency-findings/register-for-article-60-final-decisions_en
using Apache Tika to allow for a better search. This might result in some characters being mangled.
Please see the original file for the official wording at
https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/edpb/files/article-60-final-decisions/summary/publishable_uk_2019-08_right_to_erasure_not_granted_summarypublic.pdf

Please see also EDPB Copyright page

Posted on

publishable_fr_2019-03_lawfulness_summarypublic.pdf

Summary Final Decision Art 60
Complaint

No violation

Background information
Date of final decision: 22 March 2019
LSA: FR
CSAs: AT, BE, DE-Berlin, DE-Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, DE-Bavaria (private sector), DE-Lower Saxony
Legal Reference: Right to object (Article 21), Principles relating to processing of personal data (Article 5), Lawfulness of the processing (Article 6), Conditions for consent (Article 7)

Decision: No violation
Key words: Rights of data subjects, Right to object, Lawfulness of processing, e-Commerce, Marketing

Summary of the Decision

Origin of the case
The data subject filed a complaint after facing difficulties in pursuing his right to object and in relation to the information required on the product order form.

Findings
The LSA found that the delay in complying with the right to object was due to the 72 hours required to process the relevant request, of which the data subject was informed. Besides, the request was submitted on a Saturday and Monday was a holiday. The data controller also took measures to clarify the e-mail address to which such requests can be submitted, and it also set up a dedicated email address to handle such requests more efficiently. In addition, the data controller no longer requires the date of birth to be provided for an order to be placed. Moreover, the consent to receive promotional offers from the controller and third parties must be explicitly given by checking the respective boxes when ordering a product.

Decision
The LSA did not identify any infringement of the obligations set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) by the controller. The data controller did not delay to comply with the request beyond what was reasonable and adjusted the information required to avoid collecting more data than necessary.

—
This text has been converted automatically from the PDF available via
https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/consistency-findings/register-for-article-60-final-decisions_en
using Apache Tika to allow for a better search. This might result in some characters being mangled.
Please see the original file for the official wording at
https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/edpb/files/article-60-final-decisions/summary/publishable_fr_2019-03_lawfulness_summarypublic.pdf

Please see also EDPB Copyright page