In the matter of the General Data Protection Regulation
DPC Complaint Reference:
IMI Reference:
In the matter of a complaint, lodged by with the Commission Nationale de
l'Informatique et des Libertés (France DPA) pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection
Regulation, concerning Meta Platforms Ireland Limited (formerly Facebook 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 ON 12 MAY 2022)
Dated the 14th day of April 2023
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 23 January 2021, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint
pursuant to Article 77 of the GDPR with the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des
Libertés (“the Recipient SA”) concerning Meta Platforms Ireland Limited (formerly Facebook
Ireland 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) of the GDPR, the Recipient SA transferred
the complaint to the DPC on 13 December 2021.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. The Data Subject initially contacted the Recipient SA on 23 January 2021, with a
request for the erasure of content containing their personal data, which consisted of
forty URL’s, posted by a third-party user to the Instagram platform. As the Data
Subject had not previously done so, they then raised the matter with the Respondent
on 26 January 2021. In their correspondence to the Respondent, they made a request
under Article 17 of the GDPR for the deletion of the content from the Respondent’s
platform.
b. On 26 January 2021, the Respondent replied to the Data Subject, stating the content
was not in violation of their community guidelines, and they did not take any further
action.
c. As the Data Subject was not satisfied with the response received from the Respondent
regarding the concerns raised, the Data Subject continued to pursue their complaint
with the Recipient SA.
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:
2
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:
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, the Respondent advised
that that following a review by their specialist team, they remained of the position that the
content in question was not deemed to be in violation of their terms of service or community
guidelines, and as such would not be removed.
8. The DPC continued to engage with both the Data Subject and the Respondent in order to bring
about an amicable resolution to the complaint.
9. On 16 September 2022, the Respondent contacted the Data Subject directly, informing them
that the content consisting of forty URL’s had been restricted, meaning that the content was
no longer visible on the platform for users within the EU. The Respondent also informed the
DPC of the actions it had taken.
10. On 12 October 2022, the DPC wrote to the Data Subject via the Recipient SA seeking their
views on the actions taken by the Respondent and also stating that the DPC’s understanding
of restricting access to content in the EU includes both the EEA and the UK. The Recipient SA
thereafter issued this correspondence to the Data Subject on 15 November 2022.
11. On 21 November 2022, the DPC received correspondence from the Respondent indicating
that they had received further communication from the Data Subject. Within this
correspondence, the Respondent noted that the Data Subject had informed them they were
satisfied with the actions taken in relation to the content. Following receipt of this
3
correspondence, on 8 December 2022, the DPC wrote to the Data Subject via the Recipient
SA again reiterating the actions taken by the Respondent, along with a copy of the
correspondence in which the Data Subject confirmed their satisfaction with the actions of the
respondent, for verification. In this correspondence, the DPC requested a reply, within a
stated timeframe. The Recipient SA thereafter issued this correspondence to the Data Subject
on 13 January 2023.
12. On 09 February 2023, the Recipient SA confirmed that no response had been received from
the Data Subject.
13. On 14 February 2023, 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.
14. On 20 February 2023, the Recipient SA confirmed receipt of the DPC correspondence, which
had advised that the complaint was deemed withdrawn.
15. 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
16. 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.
17. 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:
4
_____________________________
Deputy Commissioner
Data Protection Commission
5