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 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 6th day of December 2022
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 22 February 2021, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to
Article 77 GDPR with the Data Protection Commission (“the DPC”) concerning Microsoft
Ireland Operations 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 on 26 January 2021, requesting the
delisting of a number of URLs from its search engine. The URLs which were the subject
matter of the Data Subject’s complaint related to online articles that discussed
criminal proceedings which the Data Subject had been involved in.
b. The Data Subject was not satisfied with the response received 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
implementation of amicable settlements Version 2.0, adopted on 12 May 2022 (“Document
06/2022”), and considered that:
2
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 Respondent’s intake
team had erroneously rejected the Data Subject’s delisting request. In the circumstances, the
Respondent took the following action:
a. The Respondent agreed to delist all of the URLs that were the subject matter of the
Data Subject’s complaint.
8. On 17 September 2021, the DPC outlined the Data Subject’s complaint to the Respondent. On
1 October 2021, the Respondent confirmed that it would delist the URLs which were the
subject matter of the Data Subject’s complaint. On 14 October 2021, the DPC wrote to the
Data Subject, outlining the response received from the Respondent.
9. On 9 November 2021, the DPC wrote to the Respondent again, explaining that the Data
Subject had asserted that the URLs continued to be returned against a Bing search of their
name. The DPC requested that the Respondent investigate whether the URLs had been
correctly delisted. On 23 November 2021, the Respondent outlined to the DPC that its intake
team had erroneously rejected the Data Subject’s delisting request, and that it was currently
working on delisting the URLs. On 6 January 2022, the Respondent confirmed that the URLs
which were the subject matter of the Data Subject’s complaint had now been delisted.
10. On 20 January 2022, the DPC carried out a Bing search against the Data Subject’s name, and
determined that one of the URLs which the Respondent had previously confirmed would be
delisted continued to be returned, along with a new URL – not previously submitted to the
Respondent for delisting – containing similar content to one of the other URLs. Following
further engagement with the Respondent, on 14 February 2022 the Respondent confirmed to
the DPC that these URLs had now been delisted. On 24 February 2022, the DPC wrote to the
Data Subject, outlining the response received from the Respondent. In the circumstances, the
DPC asked the Data Subject to notify it, within one month, 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. 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
12. 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.
13. 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