← Back

EDPB (European Data Protection Board) · EU-wide · 14 Jul 2026 · Rule change

EDPB binding decision: Belgian DPA to handle merits of NOYB cookie banner complaint against VRT

Original title: EDPB requires Belgian DPA to handle the merits of NOYB cookie banner complaint

AI-generated summary

The EDPB issued a binding decision on 28 May 2026 requiring the Belgian DPA to assess the merits of a complaint against VRT's cookie banners rather than dismiss it on procedural grounds. The Austrian NGO Noyb filed the complaint with the Austrian DPA, which objected when the Belgian DPA proposed dismissing it as an abuse of rights. The EDPB found no abuse occurred and instructed the Belgian DPA to evaluate the complaint substantively and submit a new draft decision.

Dates and deadlines
Applies from
28 May 2026
From EDPB (European Data Protection Board)

Brussels, 14 July–The EDPB has published its binding decision of 28 May 2026 under Art.65(1)(a) GDPR*. The decision concerns a dispute submitted by the Belgian Data Protection Authority (DPA) about a complaint against Vlaamse Radio-en Televisieomroeporganisatie (VRT) – a public broadcasting company based in Belgium.

The complaint was lodged with the Austrian DPA by the Austrian-based NGO Noyb on behalf of an individual. It concerns the use of cookie banners on the website of VRT.

The Belgian DPA, acting as Lead Supervisory Authority (LSA), submitted a draft decision proposing to dismiss the complaint on the basis of an alleged abuse of Art.77 GDPR and Art. 80(1) GDPR. The Austrian DPA, Concerned Supervisory Authority (CSA), objected, arguing that the LSA should not have dismissed the complaint on procedural grounds and should have instead issued a decision on the merits.

The Belgian DPA decided not to follow the objection and submitted the case to the EDPB.

Outcome of the EDPB decision

The EDPB considered the Austrian DPA’s objection relevant and reasoned within the meaning of Art.4(24) GDPR and the EDPB Guidelines on the concept of relevant and reasoned objection and assessed it on the merits.

The EDPB found that, based on the information available and in line with the CJEU’s test for alleged abuse, the complainant did not abuse their rights under Art.77 and Art.80(1) GDPR. This is because the objective and subjective components needed to prove such abuse were not demonstrated.

Therefore, the EDPB instructed the LSA not to dismiss the complaint, but to assess it instead on its merits and to submit a new draft decision to the CSAs under Art.60(3) GDPR.

*Art.65(1)(a) GDPR is a dispute resolution mechanism meant to ensure the correct and consistent application of the GDPR in cross-border cases, addressing disagreements that have arisen between the LSA and the CSAs in a given case.

Excerpt from the official page. The original is authoritative.