## Facts

- Österreichische Post AG processed and commercialized personal data, including algorithmic inferences about Austrian residents’ probable political party affinities for targeted political advertising.
- UI, an Austrian resident, was subject to this profiling without consent and without knowing which political affinity had been attributed to him.
- UI alleged non-material harm (upset, loss of confidence, and feeling exposed) resulting from the political-affinity profiling.
- UI sought €1,000 in compensation under Article 82(1) of the GDPR for non-material damage.
- The Austrian Supreme Court stayed proceedings and referred interpretive questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union.

## Issues

1. Does an infringement of the GDPR, without proof of damage, automatically create a right to compensation under Article 82(1)?
2. May national law condition compensation for non-material damage on the harm meeting a threshold of seriousness?
3. Who determines the method for assessing and quantifying compensation under Article 82(1), and what constraints apply?

## Decision

- Article 82(1) does not provide compensation for a mere GDPR infringement absent proven damage.
- A claim under Article 82(1) requires three cumulative elements: (1) an infringement of the GDPR, (2) damage suffered (material or non-material), and (3) a causal link between the infringement and the damage.
- Article 82(1) precludes national rules or practices that require non-material damage to reach a particular degree of seriousness before compensation is available.
- In the absence of EU rules on calculating damages, national law governs assessment and quantification, subject to the principles of equivalence and effectiveness and the requirement of full and effective compensation.
- The court did not award UI damages; it provided a preliminary ruling and left application and quantification to the referring national court.

## Legal Principles

- GDPR Article 82(1) is compensatory, not punitive; compensation depends on proven harm and causation, not the infringement alone.
- Non-material damage is compensable if actually suffered and proven; Member States may not exclude compensation by imposing a de minimis seriousness threshold.
- National rules on remedies and quantification apply only if they are no less favorable than comparable domestic actions (equivalence) and do not make EU rights practically impossible or excessively difficult to exercise (effectiveness).
- Compensation must be full and effective for the damage actually suffered; EU law does not set a uniform tariff.

## Conclusion

The court held that Article 82 GDPR requires proof of damage and causation in addition to an infringement, forbids national seriousness thresholds for non-material harm, and leaves quantification to national law subject to equivalence, effectiveness, and full-compensation requirements.


UI v. Österreichische Post AG, Case C-300/21 (C.J.E.U. 2023)