In the past years we have identified more than 60 procedural issues that we have experienced first-hand in daily operations. We have summarized them on the page below. Many of these issues are symptoms of an underlying procedural problem.

Effective procedure – challenging the scope of the investigation as determined by the LSA 

Article(s) involved (national, EU, or other): Article 60(3) GDPR


Many responsibilities rest upon the LSA in the context of the OSS mechanism, and in particular deciding on the scope of the investigation itself (i.e. which potential breaches are being investigated). Later in the procedure, the CSAs can only share their reasoned objections on the draft decision communicated by the LSA within that scope. It is too late to ask the LSA to extend the scope of the investigation to other potential breaches. Some SAs are even not allowed due to their national procedural laws to extend the scope of their investigation after a draft decision is shared (see e.g., Belgium). 

Ideal Solution

Before submitting a draft decision on the merits of the complaint, the LSA should first consult and agree with CSAs on the scope of the investigation itself.

Proposed Solution

Concepts 3 and 5 address this issue.

Reference to specific noyb cases:

EDPB Binding decision 1/2021 in the WhatsApp case: pt. 159: “the DE SA considers that “consensus on the scope of the investigation should be reached at an earlier stage by the competent supervisory authorities than in the current stage of the draft decision. Therefore, before providing the draft decision of the ex officio procedure the DPC should have sought consensus regarding the scope of the procedure prior to initiating the procedure formally”.

National Issues

National Issues