Take-Aways (AI)
  • Bern-Mit­tel­land Regio­nal Court ruled that Art. 8 FADP and Art. 15 GDPR do not justi­fy a cla­im for dis­clo­sure of indi­vi­du­al data recipients.
  • Data sub­jects are only entit­led to be infor­med of the cate­go­ries of reci­pi­en­ts, par­ti­cu­lar­ly in the case of cre­dit information.
  • Court left open whe­ther the GDPR was geo­gra­phi­cal­ly appli­ca­ble; dis­pu­te was a dome­stic mat­ter, plain­ti­ff reli­ed on Art. 3 and 15 GDPR.

Update: The judgment is final.

In a decis­i­on of March 13, 2019, which is not yet final, the Regio­nal Court Bern-Mit­tel­land con­side­red that neither from Art. 8 FDPA nor from Art. 15 GDPR a right to dis­clo­sure sin­gle recei­ver of per­so­nal data fol­lows. The lat­ter applies at least to cre­dit reports. The data sub­ject has a right in each case only to Announce­ment of the Reci­pi­ent cate­go­ries. Becau­se the cor­re­spon­ding cla­im was thus to be dis­missed, the court left open whe­ther the GDPR was geo­gra­phi­cal­ly appli­ca­ble at all (which it cle­ar­ly was not – it was a dome­stic mat­ter, but the plain­ti­ff invo­ked Art. 3 GDPR [not Art. 139 IPRG] and on Art. 15 GDPR).

The docu­ment is available here. Dis­clai­mer: The defen­dant was repre­sen­ted by Wal­der Wyss.