Ruling
Council of State: DPA could fine DPG Media for routinely demanding ID copies, fine halved to 262,500 euros
- Date
- Status
- final
- Body
- Raad van State, Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak
- Reference
- ECLI:NL:RVS:2025:4562 (zaaknummer 202305954/1/A3; eerste aanleg ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2023:5074)
- Amount
- €262,500
What it is about
DPG Media routinely required a copy of an ID document up front from subscribers requesting access or erasure outside its online login environment, without first checking whether a less intrusive method, such as a customer number or email verification, would do. The DPA imposed a 525,000 euro fine in January 2022. In 2023 the Amsterdam District Court found a breach of Article 12(2) GDPR but annulled the fine entirely. The Council of State held that the DPA was entitled to fine, because this was structural policy at a large media company rather than an incident. However, the DPA failed to address the mitigation grounds raised, breaching the duty to give reasons. The Council itself reduced the fine by 50 percent to 262,500 euros, citing among other things the relatively small number of cases, the destruction of copies within a month and the policy change well before the enforcement notice.
What this means in practice
Ask for an ID copy only where you reasonably doubt identity and a lighter method (customer number, email verification, other known data) will not do; a blanket rule of always demanding a copy up front breaches Article 12(2) and the data minimisation principle. State in the request itself that a masked copy is enough and destroy copies quickly. If you raise mitigation grounds, the DPA must address them with reasons; if it does not, the court can reduce the fine itself.
The GDPR articles concerned
- Article 5: Principles relating to processing of personal data
- Article 12: Transparent information, communication and modalities for the exercise of the rights of the data subject
- Article 15: Right of access by the data subject
- Article 17: Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)
- Article 58: Powers
- Article 83: General conditions for imposing administrative fines
Source: Rechtspraak.nlchecked on 15 September 2026
Summary and practical reading by Praxikon. Not legal advice; the source prevails.
Connections
What connects to this development
Themes where this returns
The counterpart in the other law
- Article 10 AI Act: Data and data governance
- Article 11 AI Act: Technical documentation
via Keeping records: record of processing, technical documentation and logs
- Article 12 AI Act: Record-keeping
via Keeping records: record of processing, technical documentation and logs
- Article 14 AI Act: Human oversight
- Article 18 AI Act: Documentation keeping
via Keeping records: record of processing, technical documentation and logs
- Article 19 AI Act: Automatically generated logs
via Keeping records: record of processing, technical documentation and logs
- Article 26 AI Act: Obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems
via Keeping records: record of processing, technical documentation and logs
- Article 50 AI Act: Transparency obligations for providers and deployers of certain AI systems
- Article 70 AI Act: Designation of national competent authorities and single points of contact
- Article 74 AI Act: Market surveillance and control of AI systems in the Union market
- Article 86 AI Act: Right to explanation of individual decision-making
- Article 99 AI Act: Penalties
Case law8 of 19
- Council of State upholds 6,000 euro DPA fine for recruitment firm
2024-05-29 · final, Raad van State, Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak
- Brillen Rottler: even a first access request can be abusive if made solely to claim compensation
2026-03-19 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Vierde kamer), Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG tegen TC
- Dun & Bradstreet: right to an intelligible explanation of an automated decision, trade secrets are no absolute ground for refusal
2025-02-27 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Eerste kamer), CK tegen Magistrat der Stadt Wien, met Dun & Bradstreet Austria GmbH als andere partij
- Deutsche Wohnen: a fine on a legal person needs no identified natural person, but does require fault
2023-12-05 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Grote kamer), Deutsche Wohnen SE tegen Staatsanwaltschaft Berlin
- Land Hessen: the supervisory authority need not always fine where the organisation already remedied the breach
2024-09-26 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Eerste kamer), TR tegen Land Hessen
- Interim relief judge: DPA must redact fine amount when giving an enforcement decision to complainants
2024-05-31 · status not established, Rechtbank Den Haag, voorzieningenrechter (kort geding, team handel)
- Reddit's summary proceedings against the DPA over a penalty order and legal privilege dismissed
2026-03-04 · status not established, Rechtbank Den Haag, voorzieningenrechter
- Noord-Nederland District Court upholds DPA fine for village livestream, reduces it to 375 euros
2025-01-09 · status not established, Rechtbank Noord-Nederland
Guidelines8 of 12
- Consultation on the Dutch DPA's enforcement policy (April 2026)
2026-04-13 · under consultation, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Guidelines 02/2025 on processing of personal data through blockchain technologies
2026-07-07 · final, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Guidelines 02/2026 on Anonymisation
2026-07-07 · under consultation, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Opinion 28/2024 on certain data protection aspects related to the processing of personal data in the context of AI models
2024-12-17 · final, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Guidelines on transparency under Regulation 2016/679
2018-05-25 · final, Article 29 Working Party, bekrachtigd door de European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection by Design and by Default
2020-10-20 · final, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Guidelines 03/2026 on web scraping in the context of generative AI
2026-07-07 · under consultation, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
- Guidelines 1/2024 on processing of personal data based on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR (legitimate interest)
2024-10-08 · adopted, European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
Enforcement and fines8 of 13
- Netflix fined 4.75 million euros for failing to properly inform customers
2024-11-26 · under appeal, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- 6,000 euro fine for Ambitious People Group for ignoring erasure requests
2020-07-30 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- DPA cuts Kruidvat fine to 50,000 euros on objection
2025-05-27 · status not established, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Ten municipalities fined a total of 250,000 euros for unlawful files on Muslim residents
2026-02-03 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Experian Netherlands fined 2.7 million euros for credit scoring without legal basis or information
2025-10-16 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Coolblue fined 40,000 euros on objection for cookies without consent
2024-12-23 · status not established, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Clearview AI: 30.5 million euro fine and penalty orders for illegal facial database
2024-05-16 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Dutch DPA and tennis federation KNLTB end litigation: fine cut from 525,000 to at most 250,000 euros
2025-10-18 · status not established, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
Legislation in motion
- Amendment to the Dutch GDPR Implementation Act: DPA must publish GDPR sanctions from 1 September 2026
2026-09-01 · in force, Wetgever (Tweede Kamer) en Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Proposal: refusing requests that abuse the right of access (Article 12(5) GDPR)
2025-11-19 · proposal, Europese Commissie
- Proposal: definition of scientific research, purpose limitation and information duty for research (Article 4(38), 5(1)(b) and 13(5) GDPR)
2025-11-19 · under negotiation, Europese Commissie
- Council: Cyprus Presidency tables negotiating mandate, Coreper vote of 26 June 2026 cancelled
2026-06-22 · under negotiation, Raad van de Europese Unie, Antici-groep (vereenvoudiging) en Coreper
- Commission publishes Digital Omnibus proposal COM(2025) 837
2025-11-19 · proposal, Europese Commissie