In the matter of the General Data Protection Regulation
DPC Complaint Reference: / IMI Ref:
In the matter of a complaint, lodged by with the Berlin Commissioner for Data
Protection and Freedom of Information pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection
Regulation, concerning
Record of Amicable Resolution of the complaint and its consequent withdrawal pursuant to
Section 109(3) of the Data Protection Act, 2018
Further to the requirements of Internal EDPB Document 06/2021 on the practical implementation
of amicable settlements (adopted on 18 November 2021)
RECORD OF AMICABLE RESOLUTION FOR THE
PURPOSE OF INTERNAL EDPB DOCUMENT 06/2021 ON
THE PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF AMICABLE
SETTLEMENTS, ADOPTED 18 NOVEMBER 2021
Dated the 12th day of August 2022
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 2 April 2021, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article
77 GDPR with the State Commissioner for Data Protection in Lower Saxony, which thereafter
referred the case to the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information
(“the Recipient SA”) concerning (“the Respondent”).
2. In circumstances where the Data Protection Commission (“the DPC”) was deemed to be the
competent authority for the purpose of Article 56(1) GDPR, the Recipient SA transferred the
complaint to the DPC on 16 June 2021.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. The Data Subject emailed the Respondent on 25 March, 28 March, 30 March and 1
April 2021, requesting the erasure of an inactive account that he held with the
Respondent, and all associated personal data.
b. The Respondent was unable to authenticate the Data Subject’s ownership of the
relevant account, as per its standard procedures, and thus did not proceed with the
erasure request of the Data Subject.
Action taken by the DPC
4. The DPC, pursuant to Section 109(4) of the Data Protection Act, 2018 (“the 2018 Act”), is
required, as a preliminary matter, to assess the likelihood of the parties to the complaint
reaching, within a reasonable time, an amicable resolution of the subject-matter of the
complaint. Where the DPC considers that there is a reasonable likelihood of such an amicable
resolution being concluded between the parties, it is empowered, by Section 109(2) of the
2018 Act, to take such steps as it considers appropriate to arrange or facilitate such an
amicable resolution.
5. Following a preliminary examination of the material referred to it by the Recipient SA, the DPC
considered that there was a reasonable likelihood of the parties concerned reaching, within a
reasonable time, an amicable resolution of the subject matter of the complaint. The DPC’s
experience is that complaints of this nature are particularly suitable for amicable resolution in
circumstances where there is an obvious solution to the dispute, if the respondent is willing
to engage in the process. In this regard, the DPC had regard to:
a. The relationship between the Data Subject and Respondent (being, in this case, an
individual consumer and a service provider); and
b. The nature of the complaint (in this case, an unsuccessful attempt by the Data Subject
to exercise his data subject rights).
2
6. While not relevant to the assessment that the DPC is required to carry out pursuant to Section
109(4) of the 2018 Act, the DPC also had regard to Internal EDPB Document 06/2021 on the
practical implementation of amicable settlements, adopted on 18 November 2021
(“Document 06/2021”), and considered that:
a. the possible conclusion of the complaint by way of amicable resolution would not
hamper the ability of the supervisory authorities to maintain the high level of
protection that the GDPR seeks to create; and that
b. such a conclusion, in this case, would likely carry advantages for the Data Subject,
whose rights under the GDPR would be vindicated swiftly, as well as for the controller,
who would be provided the opportunity to bring its behaviour into compliance with
the GDPR.
Amicable Resolution
7. The DPC engaged with both the Data Subject (via the Recipient SA) and the Respondent in
relation to the subject-matter of the complaint. Further to that engagement, it was
established that the Data Subject contacted the Respondent, requesting the erasure of an
inactive account with the Respondent, from an email that was not associated with that
account.
8. The Respondent clarified, by way of correspondence to the DPC dated 2 September 2021, that
it responded to the request of the Data Subject (which was made on 25 March 2021) on 27
March 2021. As per its standard procedures, the Respondent requested that the Data Subject
reply with the email associated with the account in question. The Data Subject had thereafter
responded to note that the email address no longer existed, but voluntarily submitted a copy
of an identity document for verification purposes.
9. The Respondent informed the DPC that, for the purposes of data minimisation, it had not
sanctioned, nor did it request, alternative forms of verification, such as the provision of ID
documents. However, the Respondent acknowledged that there had been a process
breakdown as the agent of its user support vendor had not followed the requisite script and
mistakenly cited “copyright reasons” as the justification for not using the Data Subject’s
identity card to verify account ownership.
10. In light of the complaint, the Respondent agreed to take the following action:
a. The Respondent confirmed that it had updated its verification policy to permit
alternative forms of verification, such as the voluntary provision of government
identification, in limited circumstances, including when a user cannot access the email
address associated with their account.
b. The Respondent noted that it was providing further refresher training to its internal
agents and its user support vendor agents on its updated processes and the relevant
scripts.
3
c. In accordance with its updated policies, the Respondent confirmed that it had
complied with the erasure request of the Data Subject and confirmed that his account
had been deleted.
11. The DPC thereafter, by way of correspondence issued to the Recipient SA for transmission to
the Data Subject on 10 September 2021, provided the Data Subject with the information
obtained during the complaint handling process and informed him that his desired resolution
to this complaint (i.e. the erasure of his inactive account and associated personal data) had
now been achieved. In the circumstances, the DPC asked the Data Subject to notify it, within
two months, if he was not satisfied with the outcome, so that the DPC could take further
action. The DPC did not receive any further communication from the Data Subject and,
accordingly, the complaint has been deemed to have been amicably resolved.
12. In circumstances where the subject-matter of the complaint has been amicably resolved, in
full, the complaint, by virtue of Section 109(3) of the 2018 Act, is deemed to have been
withdrawn by the Data Subject.
Confirmation of Outcome
13. For the purpose of Document 06/2021, the DPC confirms that:
a. The complaint, in its entirety, has been amicably resolved between the parties
concerned;
b. The agreed resolution is such that the object of the complaint no longer exists; and
c. Having consulted with the supervisory authorities concerned on the information set
out above, as required by Document 06/2021 the DPC has now closed off its file in
this matter.
14. If dissatisfied with the outcome recorded herein, the parties have the right to an effective
remedy by way of an application for judicial review, by the Irish High Court, of the process
applied by the DPC in the context of the within complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the DPC:
Deputy Commissioner
Data Protection Commission
4