Can an appeal against a DPA decision be inadmissible?

You disagree with a decision of the Data Protection Authority (DPA) and appeal to the Market Court. Yet the court declares your appeal ‘inadmissible’ even before the discussion on the merits. Is this possible?

Yes, it is. If your petition - the document by which you file an appeal - does not clearly state your ‘grievances,’ you risk having your appeal declared void and therefore inadmissible. This means the judge will not hear the substance of the case. A ruling of the Market Court of 17 December 2025 illustrates painfully clearly how essential these procedural requirements are.

The facts: a complaint and a dismissal

The case begins when a citizen files a complaint with the Data Protection Authority (DPA). The complaint concerns the way meter readings are recorded in the context of a contractual dispute with energy suppliers.

After investigation, on March 7, 2025, the DPA's Litigation Chamber decides to dismiss the complaint. This means that the DPA will not pursue the substance of the complaint. The DPA bases this decision on article 95, §1, 3° of the DPA Act, which allows the DPA to dismiss complaints that are not among its strategic priorities.

The complainant (the “petitioner”) disagrees with this and takes the matter to the Market Court in Brussels.He requests that the decision to dismiss the case be overturned and demands that the DPA investigate his complaint ‘on its merits’ (substantive).

The decision: appeal inadmissible

Even before discussing meter readings or DPA priorities, the DPA raises a procedural defense: the applicant's appeal is inadmissible.

The DPA notes that while the ‘petition’ (the document by which the appeal was filed) states that the applicant wants the decision overturned, nowhere does it explain why. In other words, there are no ‘grievances’ in the document.

The applicant had another opportunity later in the proceedings to rectify this through a ‘conclusion’ (a brief with detailed written argument), but he did not file this conclusion within the time limit imposed by the court. An attempt to still submit a ‘memorandum’ and documents the night before the hearing was briskly rejected by the court as late and excluded from the debate.

The Market Court followed the DPA's reasoning and ruled:

• The petition does not mention any grievance or plea.
• This harms the DPA's interests because it had no clear way of knowing exactly what it had to defend itself against.
• Therefore, the petition is void (invalid).
• Effect: The appeal is declared inadmissible.

The plaintiff loses the case based on a procedural error, without the court ever ruling on the substance of his complaint.

Legal analysis and interpretation

The DPA Act that governs appeals of DPA decisions does not itself specify what form the petition must take. Therefore, the Market Court falls back on the general rules of the Judicial Code.

Two articles are crucial here:

1. Article 1057, 7° Jud.C.: This article states that a petition of appeal must, under penalty of nullity, state “the statement of grievances”.
2. Article 1034ter, §4, Jud.C.: This article, applicable to petitions, also requires “the object and brief summary of the pleas” of the claim, under penalty of nullity.

The applicant had mentioned only the ‘object’ (the annulment) but not the ‘pleas' (the reasons).

The court must then consider whether this error prejudiced the opposing party (the DPA) (application of art. 861 Jud.C.). The court ruled that it did: without clear arguments in the starting document, the debate was “insufficiently clear” and the DPA could not fully prepare its defense.

Although the case was not adjudicated on the merits, the court added that even IF the appeal had been admissible, the chances of success were slim. The court stated that the DPA has discretion to dismiss complaints based on its strategic priorities. The Market Court points out that it does not have the jurisdiction to review those priorities of the DPA. This confirms that the DPA has wide latitude in deciding which complaints it does and does not handle.

What this specifically means

• For citizens and businesses: Filing an appeal of a DPA decision should be done carefully. Your initial petition is crucial. In it, under penalty of inadmissibility, you must at least summarize the legal and factual reasons why you are challenging the decision. Starting proceedings without clear argumentation is doomed to failure.
• For the defending party (e.g., the DPA): This ruling demonstrates the importance of examining procedural admissibility. Successfully raising a nullity or inadmissibility issue can win a case even before substantive debate has begun.
• General: This ruling reaffirms the broad dismissal power of the DPA. If your complaint does not fit within the DPA's strategic goals, there is a real chance that it will be dismissed, and the Market Court is unlikely to reverse that decision.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

What is the difference between a ‘petition’ and a ‘conclusion’?
A ‘petition’ is the document by which you initiate proceedings (or here appeal). A ‘conclusion’ is a later, more detailed document in which you fully set forth your arguments (pleas), often in response to the opposing party's arguments.

What are the ‘grievances’ in an appeal?
These are the specific legal or factual reasons why you believe the challenged decision is wrong. For example, “The DPA misinterpreted the law” or “The DPA wrongly ignored my evidence.” Without giving these, your appeal is meaningless and inadmissible.

I am late with my conclusion. Can I submit a ‘note’ the night before the hearing?
No. In this ruling, the Market Court applied the strict rule of the Judicial Code (Art. 747): briefs, memoranda or exhibits filed after the agreed-upon deadlines are “ex officio excluded from debate.” Late is irrevocably late.

Conclusion

Filing an appeal with the Market Court against a decision of the GBA must be done carefully. This ruling mercilessly demonstrates that in Belgium, failure to comply with formal requirements, such as clearly formulating your grievances in the petition, leads to an immediate and definitive end of the proceedings. The content of your complaint then no longer matters.