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 Commission Nationale de
l'Informatique et des Libertés pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection Regulation,
concerning LinkedIn Ireland UC.
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 11th day of March 2024
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 1 September 2022, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article
77 GDPR with Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (“the Recipient SA”)
concerning LinkedIn Ireland UC (“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 21 June 2023.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. The Data Subject contacted the Respondent on 1 September 2022 via the postal
service requesting access to their personal data following the disablement of their
account. In particular, the Data Subject raised concerns relating to (i) apparent
connections made using their phone contacts despite those contacts not having been
linked by the Data Subject to their LinkedIn account; (ii) suspicions that the LinkedIn
app was running in the background without the Data Subject’s permission; and (iii)
the apparent disclosure of the Data Subject’s location information to the Respondent
without permission.
b. The Data Subject did not receive any 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 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).
2
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 17 August 2023, the DPC formally commenced its
investigation with the Respondent.
8. In its response, the Respondent informed the DPC that it contacted the Data Subject directly
and provided them with access to a copy of their personal data and reversed the disablement
of their account. The Respondent informed the Data Subject that a temporary hold had been
placed on their account after an attempted login at an unknown location was detected. The
Respondent provided the DPC with a step-by-step explanation of the information displayed
to its members when a temporary hold is placed on an account.
9. The Respondent explained to the DPC that it offers its members the option to import and sync
email/phone contacts in order for members to find and connect with people they know. This
is an optional function, which is located in the account preferences section. The Respondent
informed the DPC that the Data Subject did not appear to have imported any email or phone
contacts, therefore, it did not have access to their contacts and explained how the connections
made were based solely on information made available by the DS.
10. The Respondent found that the Data Subject had provided it with a specific location (their
town and region). This explained why the Data Subject could view area-specific content. The
Respondent explained how the Data Subject could change or remove their location by visiting
their account settings at any time. The Respondent further explained that its app operation
settings are industry standard, and cannot deliberately keep the application running in the
background. The Respondent therefore advised the Data Subject to change their app
background refresh/operating settings on their mobile phone, and explained that this process
falls under the operating system settings of each device and is not related to a specific setting
or functionality of the LinkedIn app.
3
11. In light of the explanations provided by the Respondent as set out above, and the fact that it
had facilitated the Data Subject in regaining full access to their account, the DPC considered
it appropriate to conclude the complaint by way of amicable resolution. On 6 December 2023,
the DPC wrote to the Data Subject (via the Recipient SA) informing them of the Respondent’s
response to the concerns that were raised in their complaint and proposed to conclude the
complaint by way of amicable resolution. In the circumstances, the DPC asked the Data
Subject to notify it, within specific timeframe, 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.
12. On 7 February 2024, 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.
13. 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
14. 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.
15. 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