In the matter of the General Data Protection Regulation
DPC Complaint Reference:
In the matter of a complaint, lodged by with the Data Protection Commission
pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection Regulation, concerning Meta Platforms
Ireland 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 27 May 2021, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article
77 GDPR with the Data Protection Commission (“the DPC”) concerning Meta Platforms Ireland
Limited (“the Respondent”).
2. The DPC was deemed to be the competent authority for the purpose of Article 56(1) GDPR.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. The Data Subject contacted the Respondent by post on 25 March 2021, requesting access
to their personal data. The Data Subject also noted that a previous access request
submitted to the Respondent on 4 February 2021 was not completed.
b. The Data Subject wrote to the Respondent again on 27 April 2021, outlining that neither
of their two previous access requests had been completed. The Data Subject asserted that
they did not receive a response from the Respondent.
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 Data Subject, 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 and Respondent in relation to the subject matter
of the complaint. Further to that engagement, it was established that the email address the
Data Subject had contacted was not a valid email address for the Respondent, however, the
access request they had made by post had not been responded to. In the circumstances, the
Respondent took the following action:
a. The Respondent explained to the DPC that due to an administrative error, the access
request made by post was not forwarded to the appropriate team. The Respondent
confirmed that it has since rectified this issue;
b. The Respondent wrote directly to the Data Subject, providing them with data download
links to access their personal data.
8. On 17 September 2021, the DPC outlined the Data Subject’s complaint to the Respondent.
The DPC noted that it had already established with the Respondent that the email address
used by the Data Subject to make their access request of 4 February 2021 was not a valid
email address for the Respondent, and had informed the Data Subject of same. The DPC
requested that the Respondent respond to the substance of the Data Subject’s access request
and provide the Data Subject with information about the processing of their personal data.
9. On 5 October 2021 and 13 October 2021, the DPC received correspondence from the
Respondent, confirming that it had written to the Data Subject directly in response to their
access request and had provided the Data Subject with information regarding the processing
of their personal data. The Respondent also explained that due to an administrative error, the
Data Subject’s access request made by post was not forwarded to the appropriate team at the
time. The Respondent confirmed that that this internal issue has since been rectified, and that
it had apologised to the Data Subject for the delay in responding to their access request.
10. On 26 October 2021, the DPC engaged further with the Respondent, highlighting that the Data
Subject had stated in their original correspondence that they did not wish to use the
Respondent’s tools to exercise their rights under the GDPR and was not legally required to do
so. The DPC highlighted that the Data Subject wished to receive their data by email.
3
11. On 1 November 2021, the Respondent confirmed to the DPC that it had written to the Data
Subject again, providing a data download link in respect of each of their accounts. On 9
November 2021, the DPC outlined the Respondent’s correspondence to the Data Subject. 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 be 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 06/2022, 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