{"id":312,"date":"2021-04-01T13:02:00","date_gmt":"2021-04-01T11:02:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stage.usercentrics.com\/?post_type=knowledge&p=8238"},"modified":"2025-09-26T15:47:05","modified_gmt":"2025-09-26T13:47:05","slug":"non-compliant-cookie-banner","status":"publish","type":"knowledge","link":"https:\/\/usercentrics-poc.psapp.dev\/us\/knowledge-hub\/non-compliant-cookie-banner\/","title":{"rendered":"Non-compliant Cookie Banner: why 5 big German companies have now been issued warnings"},"content":{"rendered":"

Whether a cookie banner complies with the GDPR<\/a> or not is no longer a matter of interpretation. On the contrary: since the German Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) ruled on the <\/span>Planet49 case<\/span><\/a>, there have been clear announcements from the courts at the latest. The <\/span>\u201cVerbraucherzentrale Rheinland Pfalz\u201d<\/span><\/a> (the Consumer Representation of the German federal state Rheinland Pfalz) has now reviewed the cookie banners from 50 websites – and issued warnings to five companies for various reasons.<\/span><\/p>\n

LEGAL BACKGROUND<\/span><\/p>\n

Setting cookies that are not necessary or functional is only permitted with the consent of users. This is the reason why anyone who wants to collect data for marketing purposes must ask their users for permission in advance (<\/span>BGH ruling of May 28, 2020<\/span><\/a>). And website operators can\u2019t just do it the way they want, they need to gather consent according to very specific criteria.<\/span><\/p>\n

For more information, see <\/span><\/i>“7 Criteria for a GDPR-compliant consent”<\/span><\/i><\/a>.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n\n\n

Which companies were affected? And why did they get a warning?<\/h2>\n\n\n

\u26a0 Chefkoch.de<\/b><\/p>\n

Reason for the warning:<\/span> The cookie banner obscured the imprint and privacy policy. In addition, users might have been tricked into thinking they only had the option of agreeing to cookies.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequence:<\/span> The company reacted promptly and already promised a change in an out-of-court settlement. In the meantime, the banner has been made more consumer-friendly.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u26a0 Deichmann<\/b><\/p>\n

Reason for the warning:<\/span> The Deichmann website only contained a non-functional cookie notice, which users could hide by clicking on an “OK” button. In addition, there was neither a corresponding reject button nor granular selection options.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequence:<\/span> After receiving the warning, Deichmann redesigned the banner accordingly.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u26a0 Finanztreff & Doodle<\/b><\/p>\n

Reason for the warning:<\/span> Both websites used preset checkboxes or sliders on their cookie banner. Users had to deactivate these so that their data would not be passed on to third parties for advertising purposes.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequence:<\/span> Both Finanztreff and Doodle issued the required cease and desist declaration and redesigned their cookie banners accordingly.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u26a0 Tripadvisor<\/b><\/p>\n

Reason for the warning:<\/span> Tripadvisor was using a non-functional cookie banner and interpreted the mere use of the page as consent to the setting of technically unnecessary cookies. Thus, Tripadvisor interpreted scrolling, surfing on the website or clicking a button as consent. The fact that the cookie banner was very small was also criticized, which possibly made some users overlook it altogether.<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequence:<\/span> After a warning by the consumer advice center, Tripadvisor completely redesigned its Cookie Banner.<\/span><\/p>\n\n

\n
\n
\n
Whitepaper<\/div>\n
The GDPR and cookie compliance <\/div>\n
\n

Your website is your introduction to the world. Does it build trust with your company? Get our GDPR Cookie Compliance Checklist to be sure. <\/p>\n <\/div>\n

\n Read now<\/span><\/a> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n \"Icon_Checklist\" <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n