In the matter of the General Data Protection Regulation
DPC Complaint Reference:
IMI Complaint Reference Number:
In the matter of a complaint, lodged by with the Spanish Data Protection
Authority pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection Regulation, concerning Microsoft
Ireland Operations Limited.
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 EDPB Guidelines 06/2022 on the practical implementation of
amicable settlements Version 2.0 (adopted on 12 May 2022)
RECORD OF AMICABLE RESOLUTION FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EDPB GUIDELINES 06/2022 ON THE
PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF AMICABLE
SETTLEMENTS VERSION 2.0, ADOPTED 12 MAY 2022
Dated the 18th day of November 2022
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 15 August 2020, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to
Article 77 GDPR with the Spanish Data Protection Authority (“the Recipient SA”) concerning
Microsoft Ireland Operations Limited (“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 December 2020.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. The Data Subject contacted the Respondent requesting the delisting of a number of
URLs in the Bing search engine. The URLs which the Data Subject sought to have
delisted related to the website of the Official Spanish State Bulletin. The Data Subject
was concerned, as the URLs contained their full Spanish DNI number (National Identity
number).
b. The Data Subject was not satisfied with the Respondent’s response.
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 their data subject rights).
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 EDPB Guidelines 06/2022 on the practical
2
implementation of amicable settlements Version 2.0, adopted on 12 May 2022 (“Document
06/2022”), 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 Respondent in relation
to the subject matter of the complaint. Further to that engagement, it was established that
the Spanish data protection law no longer allowed the disclosure of a citizen’s complete
National Identity number alongside their name and surnames, when publishing administrative
acts. In the circumstances, the Respondent took the following action:
a. The Respondent agreed to delist the URLs returning against the Data Subject’s name,
following confirmation that Spanish data protection law no longer allowed the
disclosure of a citizen’s complete National Identity number alongside their name and
surnames, when publicizing administrative acts.
8. On 5 March 2021, the DPC wrote to the Respondent, outlining the Data Subject’s complaint.
On 22 March 2021, the Respondent responded to the DPC, reiterating its position that the
requested URLs should not be delisted as they contained information of public relevance, and
that the information was published in an official bulletin of a Government body.
9. Subsequently, the DPC wrote to the Spanish DPA, raising queries regarding content that has
been published by the Spanish Government being assumed to be ‘of public relevance’. On 7
October 2021, the Spanish DPA stated that, due to the introduction of GDPR, Spanish data
protection law had been modified, and currently the Government was not allowed to disclose
a citizen’s complete National Identity number alongside their name and surnames, when
publicizing administrative acts.
10. On 21 October 2021, the DPC wrote to the Respondent again, outlining this change to the
Spanish data protection law, and asking it consider this information in the context of the Data
Subject’s delisting request. On 4 November 2021, the Respondent confirmed that it would
now delist all the requested URLs. On 9 December 2021, the DPC informed the Data Subject
via the Recipient SA that the Respondent had agreed to delist the requested URLs. In the
circumstances, the DPC asked the Data Subject to notify it, within 2 months, if they were 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.
3
11. On 9 August 2022, and in light of the foregoing, the DPC wrote to the Recipient SA noting that
the DPC considered the complaint to have been amicably resolved and withdrawn in
accordance with section 109(3) of the Act and that it would conclude the case and inform the
Respondent.
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 06/2022, 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 06/2022 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