Skip to content
Enforcement · AZOP (Croatia) ·Decision 14-09-2023 EN LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this document. Contains: this document’s text, its sections with their topics, and the full text of every law provision it applies. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Decision 14-09-2023

Status Not cited by any decision here yet

Holding

The AZOP found three GDPR infringements by both controllers. First, the AZOP held that, failing to prove the existence of a legal basis for processing of personal data of the visitors of their websites through the use of cookies, the controllers acted contrary to Article 6(1) GDPR. In this, the controllers also failed to collect valid consents by the data subjects visiting their web pages. Namely, the controllers did not require separate consents for each type of cookie according to their functionality and in some cases there was no option to withdraw one's consent. This, according to the AZOP amounted to a violation of Article 7 GDPR. Further, the AZOP established that the controllers did not adequately inform the website visitors about the processing of personal data, i.e. about the use of cookies, the legal basis therefore and the period of storage of their personal data, thereby violating Article 13(1) GDPR and Article 13(2) GDPR. Accordingly, the AZOP decided to impose an administrative fine on each company in line with Article 83(2) GDPR, in the amounts of €20,000 and €30,000 respectively.

From GDPRhub’s case note — a summary of the decision, not its own words. Read it in the text ↓

Full text 3 findings

Machine translation of the decision, via GDPRhub — not the official text. Read the original

Paragraphs carrying a topic or an applied provision show those connections inline
§

The Agency for the Protection of Personal Data imposed two administrative fines on data processors, gambling and betting companies in the amount of EUR 20,000.00 (HRK 150,690.00) and EUR 30,000.00 (HRK 226,035.00), due to three identified violations General regulations on data protection in both cases: The processing managers collected and processed the personal data of respondents or website visitors through cookies without a legal basis, which violated Art. 6, paragraph 1 of the General Data Protection Regulation. Namely, in order for the processing of personal data to be legal, the existence of at least one of the legal bases from the article in question is necessary, which in this particular case the processing managers did not fulfill, that is, they did not prove the existence of a legal basis for the processing of personal data through cookies (cookies - small files that The Internet browser stores on the computer, mobile device or other device with which the respondent visited the Internet pages, and in this way they remember and monitor his further actions on the Internet pages, and which processing is also related to aspects of personal data).

§

In the same way, the data controllers did not adequately provide information to the respondents, i.e. enable the respondents to be sufficiently informed, i.e. voluntarily give and/or withdraw their consent, which violated Article 7 of the General Data Protection Regulation. Namely, the visitor must give separate consent for each type of cookie according to their functionality, that is, consent cannot be combined for all types of cookies, and in specific cases there was no option to give/withdraw consent separately for each type of cookie. It was established that the data controllers did not adequately inform the respondents (website visitors) about the processing of personal data, i.e. about the processing of data through cookies, which violated Art. 13, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the General Data Protection Regulation. Namely, the processing managers did not inform the respondents about the subject processing in accordance with the principle of transparency, and thus the respondents (website visitors) were deprived of information about data processing such as the legal basis, the function of each cookie and the cookie storage period.

§

When deciding on the imposition of administrative fines and their amounts, attention is paid to the provisions specified in Article 83 paragraph 2 of the General Data Protection Regulation, such as the nature, severity and duration of the violation; whether the violation is intentional or negligent; the degree of responsibility of the data controller, etc.

How it connects

3 of 3 paragraphs apply legislation or carry a topic — see them in the full text ↓
C-654/23 Inteligo Media SA v Autoritatea Naţională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP) Het Hof van Justitie van de EU (Eerste Kamer) beantwoordt een prejudiciële vraag over de uitleg van artikel 13 van Richtlijn 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy) en de verhouding tot de GDPR,… Mar 27, 2025 Telecommunications Personal Data Marketing
C-604/22 IAB Europe v Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit In Case C-604/22, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on a preliminary reference from the Brussels Court of Appeal in proceedings between IAB Europe and the Belgian… Fourth Chamber Mar 7, 2024 Controllers IP Address Personal Data
C-60/22 UZ v Bundesrepublik Deutschland In Case C-60/22, the CJEU (Fifth Chamber) ruled on a preliminary reference from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden concerning UZ, a third-country national, and the Bundesrepublik… Fifth Chamber May 4, 2023 Right to Restriction Controllers Personal Data
C-46/23 Budapest Főváros IV. Kerület Újpest Önkormányzat Polgármesteri Hivatala v Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság In a preliminary ruling requested by the Budapest High Court, the Court of Justice interpreted whether Article 58(2)(d) and (g) of the GDPR permits a national supervisory… Fifth Chamber Mar 14, 2024 Right to be Forgotten Personal Data Right to Restriction
C-757/22 Meta Platforms Ireland Limited v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände - Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V In a preliminary ruling requested by the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), the Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted Article 80(2) GDPR in the… Fourth Chamber Jul 11, 2024 Personal Data Transparency Fairness & Transparency