[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$fCbDEmgx04P5wMMN--v5CrF6qqSEUmuLga0M1fUl6wyA":3},{"article":4,"iocs":41,"watch_terms":42,"solutions":43,"lesson":46},{"id":5,"title":6,"slug":7,"summary":8,"ai_summary":9,"brief":10,"url":11,"image_url":12,"published_at":13,"ingested_at":14,"relevance_score":15,"entities":16,"category_id":23,"category":24,"article_tags":28},"4680a306-c4a5-403f-8aba-d43553b67ff3","FiS - 13308-22","fis-13308-22-71bc55","← Older revision Revision as of 08:49, 24 June 2026 Line 12: Line 12: |ECLI= |ECLI= |Original_Source_Name_1= |Original_Source_Name_1=IMY |Original_Source_Link_1=https:\u002F\u002Fgdprhub.eu\u002Fimages\u002Fc\u002Fc2\u002FPriloga_1_-_sodba_13308-22.pdf |Original_Source_Link_1=https:\u002F\u002Fgdprhub.eu\u002Fimages\u002Fc\u002Fc2\u002FPriloga_1_-_sodba_13308-22.pdf |Original_Source_Language_1=Swedish |Original_Source_Language_1=Swedish","The Stockholm Administrative Court ruled that individuals filing GDPR complaints have party status and can demand a decision within six months, even if the Data Protection Authority (DPA) is conducting a parallel investigation. This decision upholds the complainant's right to an effective remedy and prevents them from being disadvantaged by the DPA's procedural choices.","Swedish court rules GDPR complainants have party status and can demand decisions.","https:\u002F\u002Fgdprhub.eu\u002Findex.php?title=FiS_-_13308-22&diff=51979&oldid=33425","https:\u002F\u002Fgdprhub.eu\u002Fimages\u002F4\u002F4c\u002FCourts_logo1.png","2026-06-24T08:49:59+00:00","2026-06-24T10:00:13.856115+00:00",7,[17,20],{"name":18,"type":19},"Spotify","product",{"name":21,"type":22},"IMY","vendor","c5c77cdb-f7d7-4990-9436-c81dcbff1163",{"id":23,"icon":25,"name":26,"slug":27},null,"Policy","policy",[29,34,39],{"category":30},{"id":31,"icon":25,"name":32,"slug":33},"3f0f8451-91df-4b6c-9a73-ef3b2509b7f1","GDPR","gdpr",{"category":35},{"id":36,"icon":25,"name":37,"slug":38},"53f9c4b6-8bc6-4964-9169-d09e5cd41d72","Compliance","compliance",{"category":40},{"id":23,"icon":25,"name":26,"slug":27},[],[21,18],{"controls":44,"vendors":45},[],[],{"slug":47,"title":48,"body":49,"framework_refs":50,"framework_notes":60},"gdpr-complainants-have-right-to-timely-dpa-decisions-court-rules","GDPR Complainants Have Right to Timely DPA Decisions, Court Rules","The Stockholm Administrative Court affirmed that individuals filing GDPR complaints hold party status, entitling them to a formal decision within six months regardless of any parallel DPA investigation. This ruling highlights a critical procedural obligation: Data Protection Authorities cannot indefinitely defer complainant resolutions by sheltering behind their own investigative timelines. Organizations and DPAs alike must recognize that complainants' rights to effective remedy are legally enforceable, not discretionary. Failure to respect these timelines exposes DPAs to legal challenge and undermines public trust in data protection enforcement. This decision sets a precedent that procedural delays are not a permissible strategy for managing GDPR complaint backlogs.",[51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59],"GDPR Article 77 – Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority","GDPR Article 78 – Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority","GDPR Article 57(1)(f) – DPA obligation to handle complaints and inform complainants of progress","GDPR Article 60 – Cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and other supervisory authorities","NIST SP 800-53 IR-6 – Incident Reporting","NIST SP 800-53 PM-10 – Security Authorization Process (governance accountability)","CIS Control 17 – Incident Response Management","ISO\u002FIEC 27001:2022 Annex A 5.34 – Privacy and protection of personally identifiable information","ITIL 4 – Service Request Management (timely resolution of user\u002Fstakeholder requests)",{}]