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 Data Protection Authority of
Bavaria for the Private Sector pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection Regulation,
concerning Yahoo EMEA 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 July 2023
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article 77 GDPR with the
Data Protection Authority of Bavaria for the Private Sector (“the Recipient SA”) concerning
Yahoo EMEA 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 19 May 2020.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. On 27 May 2018, the Data Subject contacted the Respondent by fax seeking access to
their email account. The Data Subject noted that they were unable to access their
email account without consenting to the use of cookies and similar technologies. The
Data Subject sought access to the account without the need for such consent and
further made a formal access request pursuant to Article 15 GDPR. In addition, the
Data Subject objected to the processing of their data for direct marketing purposes,
and objected to the transfer of their data to any third parties.
b. On 1 June 2018, the Respondent replied stating that it could not support such
requests by way of fax or post, and further noted that the Data Subject had provided
no alternative email through which they could be reached. The Respondent instead
directed the Data Subject to a link to a feedback form through which they could
contact an expert directly.
c. The Data Subject noted that the link led to the same page requiring them to consent
to the use of cookies and similar technologies. The Data Subject remained dissatisfied
and, accordingly, contacted the Recipient SA about their complaint on 2 June 2018.
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
2
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:
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. On 7 July 2020, the DPC wrote to the Respondent
formally commencing its investigation and requesting the Respondent to address the
concerns raised.
8. Over the course of the investigation, the Respondent explained that it had incorrectly rejected
the access request and that such requests could be supported by fax and post (as well as by
email and by phone), contrary to what was indicated at the time of the request. The
Respondent explained how it had since greatly improved its procedures for handling data
subject rights requests and provided a detailed description of the measures now in place. The
Respondent emphasised that, as a result of the measures now in place, similar issues would
not occur again.
9. The Respondent noted that the Data Subject did not appear to have ever logged back into
their account (and provide the required consents) since the date of the complaint. As such,
the Respondent explained that the Data Subject’s account would therefore have been deleted
due to inactivity, in accordance with its standard retention policies (i.e. twelve months of
inactivity from their last successful login). The Respondent provided a detailed explanation of
its retention policies and advised that, since the complaint was made, it had implemented a
new procedure to ensure that a hold would be placed on an account where a data subject
rights request was made, in order to prevent such automated deletion occurring in future.
3
10. The Respondent also explained that the cookies and similar technologies that the Data Subject
had been required to consent to were required only insofar as they were strictly necessary to
provide the email service to them. The Respondent also explained how data subjects are able
to control other aspects of how their personal data is used and who it is shared with via the
Privacy Dashboard on their account.
11. In an attempt to amicably resolve the matter, the Respondent agreed to provide the Data
Subject with a copy of their residual data on a DVD and offered the Data Subject an apology,
explaining the measures it had put in place in order to prevent similar issues from happening
again. The Respondent also sought to reach out to the Data Subject directly to resolve matters,
as well as to further explain the consents they had been required to provide in order to access
their email account at the time.
12. The Data Subject initially rejected the Respondent’s offer to reach out directly as referred to
above. However, on 13 September 2022, the Data Subject informed the DPC (via the Recipient
SA) that they had come to an agreement with the Respondent in the meantime and formally
withdrew their complaint.
13. In light of the detailed explanations provided by the Respondent, the improvements made to
its procedures since the time of the complaint, and the efforts made by the Respondent to
provide the Data Subject with their residual data and address their outstanding concerns, the
DPC was satisfied with the Data Subject’s decision to withdraw the complaint and decided
that no further action was necessary in relation to the Respondent in this matter. In light of
the foregoing, the DPC proposed to close the complaint on the basis of an amicable resolution.
14. On 27 February 2023, the Recipient SA formally confirmed to the DPC that it agreed with the
DPC’s proposal to close the complaint by way of amicable resolution. Accordingly, the DPC
deems the complaint to have been amicably resolved.
15. On 30 May 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.
16. 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
17. 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;
4
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.
18. 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
5