Deliberation No 21/RECL14/2025 of 3 March 2025 of the National
Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, on
complaint file No 6.362 lodged against the company
via IMI Article 61 procedure 174522
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27
April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and
on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (hereinafter: the ‘GDPR’);
Having regard to the Act of 1 August 2018 on the organisation of the National Data Protection
Commission and the general data protection framework (hereinafter: the ‘Law of 1 August
2018’);
Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the National Data Protection Commission adopted by
Decision No 07AD/2024 of 23 February 2024 (hereinafter: the ‘ROP’);
Having regard to the Procedure for complaints before the National Data Protection Commission
adopted on 16 October 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Complaint Procedure before the
CNPD’);
Having regard to the following:
I. Facts and procedure
1. In the framework of the European cooperation, as provided for in Chapter VII of
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the
processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing
Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation or GDPR), the
Supervisory Authority of Bavaria (Germany) submitted to the National Data
Protection Commission (hereinafter: “the CNPD”) a complaint (national reference
of the concerned authority: LDA-1085.3-6109/20-I) via IMI in accordance with
Article 61 procedure - 174522.
2. The complaint was lodged against the controller .
(hereafter “ ”), who has its main establishment in Luxembourg. Under
Article 56 GDPR, the CNPD is therefore competent to act as the lead supervisory
authority.
3. The original IMI claim stated the following:
“The complainant declares that he receives no information pursuant to Art. 15
GDPR from .”
4. In essence, the complainant asks the CNPD to order the controller to comply with
the complainant’s access request.
5. The complaint is therefore based on Article 15 GDPR.
1
Deliberation No 21/RECL14/2025 of 3 March 2025 of the National
Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, on
complaint file No 6.362 lodged against the company
via IMI Article 61 procedure 174522
6. On the basis of this complaint and in accordance with Article 57(1)(f) GDPR, the
CNPD requested to take a position on the facts reported by the
complainant and to provide a detailed description of the issue relating to the
processing of the complainant’s personal data, in particular with regard to his right
of access.
7. The CNPD received the requested information within the deadlines set.
II. In law
1. Applicable legal provisions
8. Article 77 GDPR provides that “without prejudice to any other administrative or
judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with
a supervisory authority, (...) if the data subject considers that the processing of
personal data relating to him or her infringes this Regulation.”
9. In accordance with Article 15 GDPR “The data subject shall have the right to
obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data
concerning him or her are being processed, and, where that is the case, access
to the personal data and the following information (...)”;
10. In accordance with Article 15(1) GDPR “The data subject shall have the right to
obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data
concerning him or her are being processed, and, where that is the case, access
to the personal data and the following information: (…) (c) the recipients or
categories of recipient to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed,
in particular recipients in third countries or international organisations; (…)”;
11. Furthermore, in application of Article 12(2) GDPR ”the controller shall facilitate the
exercise of data subject rights under Articles 15 to 22”. Recital 59 GDPR
emphasises that “Modalities should be provided for facilitating the exercise of the
data subject's rights under this Regulation, including mechanisms to request and,
if applicable, obtain, free of charge, in particular, access to and rectification or
erasure of personal data and the exercise of the right to object. The controller
should also provide means for requests to be made electronically, especially
where personal data are processed by electronic means.”
2
Deliberation No 21/RECL14/2025 of 3 March 2025 of the National
Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, on
complaint file No 6.362 lodged against the company
via IMI Article 61 procedure 174522
2. In the present case
12. Following the intervention of the Luxembourg supervisory authority, the controller
confirmed that:
• The customer account associated with the e-mail address (XXX) was
closed on 4 March 2020 and that the complainant was in contact with the
controller on 21 March 2020 to request access to his personal data. In
such cases, when the account is closed, the controller would have asked
Mr. XXX to authenticate via phone, and then provided him with the DSAR
response on a password protected USB stick.
• Following the intervention of the CNPD, the controller contacted Mr. XXX
again to coordinate for phone authentication. Subsequently, it will provide
him with a response to his access request on a password protected USB
stick.
3. Outcome of the case
13. The CNPD, in a plenary session, therefore considers that, at the end of the
investigation of the present complaint, the controller has taken appropriate
measures to grant the complainant’s right of access request, in accordance with
Article 15 GDPR.
14. Thus, in the light of the foregoing, and the residual nature of the gravity of the
alleged facts and the degree of impact on fundamental rights and freedoms, it
does not appear necessary to continue to deal with that complaint.
15. The CNPD then consulted the supervisory authority of Bavaria (Germany),
pursuant to Article 60(1), whether it agreed to close the case. The Supervisory
Authority of Bavaria (Germany) has responded that the complainant has not
contacted them anymore and that they therefore assumed that the cross-border
complaint could be closed.
In light of the above developments, the National Data Protection Commission, in a
plenary session, after having deliberated, decides:
3
Deliberation No 21/RECL14/2025 of 3 March 2025 of the National
Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, on
complaint file No 6.362 lodged against the company
via IMI Article 61 procedure 174522
- To close the complaint file 6.362 upon completion of its investigation, in accordance
with the Complaints Procedure before the CNPD. As per Article 60(7) GDPR, the lead
supervisory authority shall adopt and notify the decision to the main establishment or
single establishment of the controller.
Belvaux, dated 3 March 2025
The National Data Protection Commission
Chair Commissioner Commissioner
Indication of remedies
This Administrative Decision may be the subject of an appeal for amendment within three months
of its notification. Such an action must be brought by the interested party before the administrative
court and must be brought by a lawyer at the Court of one of the Bar Associations.
4