Case Law · CJEU 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.
CJEU: Facebook's German ad sales establishment triggers GDPR territorial scope
Territorial Scope / Concept of “establishment”: Facebook Germany is responsible for promoting and selling advertising space and carries on activities addressed to persons residing in Germany.
Original title: UNABHäNGIGES LANDESZENTRUM FüR DATENSCHUTZ SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN v. WIRTSCHAFTSAKADEMIE SCHLESWIG-HOLDSTEIN GmbH
Judgment
Summary
Given that a social network such as Facebook generates a substantial part of its income from advertisements posted on the web pages set up and accessed by users, and given that Facebook’s establishment in Germany is intended to ensure the promotion and sale in Germany of advertising space that makes Faceboo
Full text
summary
Territorial Scope / Concept of “establishment”: Facebook Germany is responsible for promoting and selling advertising space and carries on activities addressed to persons residing in Germany. Given that a social network such as Facebook generates a substantial part of its income from advertisements posted on the web pages set up and accessed by users, and given that Facebook’s establishment in Germany is intended to ensure the promotion and sale in Germany of advertising space that makes Facebook’s services profitable, the activities of that establishment must be regarded as inextricably linked to the processing of personal data at issue in the main proceedings. Consequently, such treatment must be regarded as being carried out in the context of the activities of an establishment of the controller (see, Google Spain paragraph 55 and 56) (¶¶ 56–61)
¶56 excerpt
As regards, second, the condition that the processing of personal data must be carried out ‘in the context of the activities’ of the establishment in question, it must be recalled, to begin with, that in view of the objective pursued by Directive 95/46 of ensuring effective and complete protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, and in particular their right to privacy with respect to the processing of personal data, the expression ‘in the context of the activities of an establishment’ cannot be interpreted restrictively (judgment of 1 October 2015, Weltimmo, C‑230/14, EU:C:2015:639, paragraph 25 and the case-law cited).
¶57 excerpt
Next, it must be pointed out that Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 95/46 does not require that such processing be carried out ‘by’ the establishment concerned itself, but only that it be carried out ‘in the context of the activities of’ the establishment (judgment of 13 May 2014, Google Spain and Google, C‑131/12, EU:C:2014:317, paragraph 52).
¶58 excerpt
In the present case, the order for reference and the written observations submitted by Facebook Ireland show that Facebook Germany is responsible for promoting and selling advertising space and carries on activities addressed to persons residing in Germany.
¶59 excerpt
As noted in paragraphs 33 and 34 above, the processing of personal data at issue in the main proceedings, carried out by Facebook Inc. jointly with Facebook Ireland, consisting in collecting personal data by means of cookies installed on the computers or other devices of visitors to fan pages hosted on Facebook, is intended, in particular, to enable Facebook to improve its system of advertising, in order better to target its communications.
¶60 excerpt
As the Advocate General observes in point 94 of his Opinion, given that a social network such as Facebook generates a substantial part of its income from advertisements posted on the web pages set up and accessed by users, and given that Facebook’s establishment in Germany is intended to ensure the promotion and sale in Germany of advertising space that makes Facebook’s services profitable, the activities of that establishment must be regarded as inextricably linked to the processing of personal data at issue in the main proceedings, for which Facebook Inc. is jointly responsible with Facebook Ireland. Consequently, such treatment must be regarded as being carried out in the context of the activities of an establishment of the controller within the meaning of Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 95/46 (see, to that effect, judgment of 13 May 2014, Google Spain and Google, C‑131/12, EU:C:2014:317, paragraphs 55 and 56).
¶61 excerpt
It follows that, since German law is applicable to the processing of personal data at issue in the main proceedings in accordance with Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 95/46, the German supervisory authority was competent under Article 28(1) of that directive to apply that law to that processing.
How it connects
Related across sources
Guidelines 3/2018 territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3) Guidelines on the territorial scope of the GDPR Guidelines ·EDPB Nov 12, 2019 Territorial scope (GDPR) IP Address Processors
Guidelines 07/2020 concepts of controller and processor in the GDPR Guidelines ·EDPB Jul 7, 2021 Controllers Processors IP Address
Guidelines 2/2020 articles 46 (2) (a) and 46 (3) (b) of Regulation 2016/679 for transfers of personal data between EEA and non-EEA public authorities and bodies Guidelines ·EDPB Dec 15, 2020 Personal Data Processing Agreement Privacy Shield
Guidelines 02/2024 Article 48 GDPR Article 48 GDPR provides that: ' Any judgment of a court or tribunal and any decision of an administrative authority of a third country requiring a controller or processor to… Guidelines ·EDPB Jun 5, 2025 Controllers Privacy Shield International Transfer
Opinion 11/2019 draft list of the competent supervisory authority of the Czech Republic regarding the processing operations exempt from the requirement of a data protection impact assessment (Article 35(5) GDPR) Opinion ·EDPB Jul 12, 2019 DPIA Supervision Supervisory Authorities
Opinion 2/2026 EDPB-EDPS Joint opinion 2/2026 on the Proposal for a Regulation as regards the simplification of the digital legislative framework ( EDPB, EDPB-EDPS Joint opinion 2/2026 on the Proposal for a Regulation as regards the simplification of the digital legislative framework (Digital Omnibus) Opinion Feb 11, 2026 Notified Body Reporting and Notification Obligations Notification Obligation Data Breaches