{"id":100716,"date":"2025-10-26T17:13:55","date_gmt":"2025-10-26T16:13:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/?p=100716"},"modified":"2025-10-26T17:35:54","modified_gmt":"2025-10-26T16:35:54","slug":"can-you-file-a-complaint-with-the-dpa-to-achieve-other-goals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/kan-u-een-klacht-bij-de-gba-indienen-om-andere-doelen-te-bereiken\/","title":{"rendered":"Can you file a complaint with the DPA to achieve other goals?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Filing a complaint with the Data Protection Authority (DPA) is a fundamental right for any citizen who believes his or her personal data is being mishandled. But what if that complaint actually serves as a strategic weapon in an entirely different conflict, such as a tax dispute? The Belgian Court of Cassation confirmed, in a ruling<\/a> of 10 January 2025 that this is not possible without further ado. Filing a GDPR complaint with the main purpose of gathering information for another dispute (a \u2018fishing expedition\u2019) can be considered an abuse of law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The facts of the case<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The case revolved around an accountant who lived in Luxembourg. The Belgian tax authorities (FPS Finance) had listed her as a \u201cfront man\u201d in various third-party tax files. The accountant disagreed and went to the FPS Finance, invoking the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)<\/a>. She asked foraccessn, rectification (correction) and erasure of the data that labeled her as front man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

FPS Finance largely refused, after which the accountant filed a complaint with the DPA. The DPA vindicated the bookkeeper, ruling in a decision of 4 June 2021 (No. 66\/2021<\/a>) that FPS Finance had violated the GDPR. It imposed a reprimand on the tax authority and ordered it to amend the data .<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision: from the Market Court to Cassation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

FPS Finance did not leave it at that and appealed to the Market Court (a specialised division of the Court of Appeal in Brussels) to challenge the decision of the DPA.<\/sup>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judgment of the Market Court<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The FPS Finance threw up a crucial argument: abuse of law. According to the tax authorities, the complainant was not at all concerned with the protection of her personal data. Her complaint was a \u201cfishing expedition\u201d: an attempt to use the GDPR to gather information about her own tax file and make potentially incriminating data disappear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Market Court followed this reasoning. It found that the complaint was indeed being used for a purpose other than that for which the right to complain under the GDPR is intended. The Court ruled that the DPA itself had also erred by violating the due diligence principle: given the clear tax context, the DPA itself should have investigated whether the complaint was not being used improperly . The Market Court therefore overturned the decision of the DPA in a ruling<\/a> of 1 December 2021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The final judgment of the Court of Cassation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The DPA in turn disagreed with the Market Court and went to the Court of Cassation, the highest court in the country<\/sup>. The DPA had two main arguments:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. The absolute right to complain:<\/strong> The DPA stated that Article 77.1 of the GDPR is an objective right. Anyone who believes their rights have been violated may complain. The underlying motives or intentions of the complainant are irrelevant. Applying the Belgian concept of \u2018abuse of rights\u2019 would prejudice this European right.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. The duty of care:<\/strong> The DPA stated that it could not be expected to investigate \u201cex officio\u201d (on its own initiative) and systematically the hidden motives of a complainant, especially if the opposing party (the FPS Finance) had not itself raised that argument during the DPA proceedings.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The Court of Cassation rejected the DPA's arguments in its ruling of 10 January 2025:<\/p>\n\n\n\n