A case for gourmets: a former employee allegedly sold company property on eBay without permission. The company gains access to the woman's private eBay account and then sues her for damages. The Higher Labor Court of Lower Saxony is now asking itself whether it is allowed to use the evidence obtained at all within the meaning of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) - or whether this violates the GDPR violated. This is now to be decided by the ECJ.
Ex-employee allegedly sold company property on eBay
In the case pending before the Higher Labor Court of Lower Saxony (case reference: 8 Sa 688/23), the plaintiff company is claiming damages of around 46,000 euros from the employee who left the company.
The company, a heating and air conditioning company, claims that the ex-employee sold items from the company's private property on eBay without authorization. Third and enriched himself from the proceeds. "The plaintiff bases her findings about the sales transactions on the fact that the defendant accessed her private eBay account without her knowledge or consent," the LAG explained in a statement.
A piquant fact: the defendant is married to the managing director of the company, but the couple live separately. How the company obtained the defendant's ebay user name and the corresponding password is disputed between the parties.
Does the ZPO need a GDPR update?
The 8th Chamber of the Higher Labor Court of Lower Saxony has now referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling.
Main reason: In its judgments of March 24, 2022 - C-245/20 - (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens) in para. 25 and of March 2, 2023 - C-268/21 - (Norra Stockholm Bygg AB) in para. 26, the Court made it clear that judicial activity, insofar as data is processed in the process, also falls within the scope of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Therefore, the LAG now wants the ECJ to answer the following two questions in particular:
- Do the provisions of national (procedural) law suffice in the case of a claim under Art. 6 (1) (e), (3) GDPR The fact that the independent judicial processing activity falls within the scope of Art. 8 para. 2, Art. 52 para. 1 GrCh and Art. 5 para. 1 lit. c GDPR the following requirement of certainty if the judicial processing activity involves interference with fundamental rights for a party or a third party?
- Can a national court rely on the Processing of - in particular personal - data to refer to these data Processing is to him pursuant to Art. 17 para. 3 letter e GDPR permitted, or do Art. 6 and 9 GDPR is the exclusive basis for a judicial processing activity?
Reading tip: ECJ rules on sending a tax return to the wrong address
LAG has reservations about BAG ruling
The first question referred seeks to clarify whether the provisions of German civil procedural law are sufficiently specific and have the necessary depth of regulation to meet the requirements of the GDPR to satisfy.
The Court is also asked which of the standards of the GDPR apply to judicial data processing activities and which legal principles are to be observed by the courts.
Although the 2nd Senate of the Federal Labor Court stated in its ruling of 29.6.2023 - 2 AZR 297/22 that the Processing of personal data by a court even if the pre- or extrajudicial collection of such data by a party to the proceedings is in accordance with the GDPR or national data protection law as unlawful.
However, the judges of the LAG have reservations about this case law and are asking the ECJ for clarification.
"The ECJ's answer to the questions can be helpful beyond the specific case in all cases in which the national courts have to assess whether and under what conditions knowledge and evidence that a party introduces into the legal dispute that may have been obtained unlawfully can be used by them," the LAG explains in its communication.
The proceedings are being conducted by the Court of Justice of the European Union under case number C-484/24.
German 
English 
Italian 
French