Mass rejection of NOYB complaints by Belgian DPA: repeating the cases I have commented before (see notably https://lnkd.in/eMGbdWPh), the Belgian DPA just rejected 16 complaints of NOYB in 5 different cases based on the fact that there was no actual (non-fictional) mandate by data subjects.
In its press release (to explain the multiple rejections), the Belgian DPA stresses again the difference between 80(1) and 80(2) GDPR and the fact that the Belgian legislator chose *not* to allow consumer rights organisations to file complaints without a mandate.
Its conclusion?
Given the importance of these organisations, the Belgian DPA is in favour of a legislative modification that would also permit this option in Belgium”.
Perhaps not the end of the issue for Belgium then, but I would be keen to know which other countries *haven’t* implemented Art. 80(2) GDPR.
Belgian DPA press release:
– FR: https://lnkd.in/eDA42v_a
– NL: https://lnkd.in/eYgb6v25
EN machine translation of the Appeal judgment to which the Belgian DPA refers regularly in its press release and the relevant decisions: https://lnkd.in/eMGbdWPh
Data protection privacy
Did this analysis get you thinking? Reach out!
DataLaws.net is entirely open-access, and instead of getting your data in exchange for this content, how about another trade? If this commentary saved you research time or sparked an idea, feel free to invite me over for tea, chai or a hot chocolate next time you are around Brussels or Antwerp - or invite me over to your offices for a chat!
Get in touch ↗ Let's connect on LinkedIn ↗