All news
Case law February 18, 2026 3 min

Italian Supreme Court 984/2026: the DPA 120-day deadline is final

The Supreme Court closes the matter: beyond 120 days the proceedings lapse

With its judgment of January 17, 2026 No. 984 (Pres. Tricomi, Rapp. Pazzi), the Italian Supreme Court established the final nature of the 120-day deadline for the exercise of the Italian DPA's sanctioning power. A ruling that brings clarity to a long-debated issue.

The case

The appellant challenged the qualification of the deadline as final, arguing a violation of Art. 143 of the Italian Privacy Code and Art. 8 of GDPR Regulation No. 2/2019. The DPA, through cross-appeal, argued instead that the deadline was merely procedural.

The Supreme Court rejected both alternative theses, confirming the final nature. Beyond 120 days the proceedings lapse and the sanction can no longer be imposed.

Why it matters for DPOs

  • Those assisting clients in DPA enforcement can plead expiration once 120 days have passed
  • The deadline starts from the formal complaint, not from when the report reaches the DPA
  • Also applies to proceedings already started and not yet closed at the date of the judgment
  • Expiration can also be detected ex officio by the court in opposition proceedings

What to do if you're in proceedings

ALWAYS document the exact date of the formal complaint received from the DPA. This is when the deadline starts. Keep the certified email of receipt.

Official source:Italian Supreme Court, Civil Section II, judgment January 17, 2026 No. 984

Looking for a workspace for your DPO work?

DPO Workspace is built by a certified DPO. 30-day free trial.

Start free

Related articles

Case law
200 €for the loss of control

Real employee data inside the test system: what loss of control is worth

Testing a new HR system with real data is not forbidden: transferring more fields than the test needs is. The German Federal Labour Court ordered an employer to pay two hundred euro because it had uploaded salary, home address, tax ID and marital status although it had agreed a list of nine fields with the works council. And it confirmed that a delayed answer to an access request is not, in itself, a damage.

Aug 21, 2026New 5 min
Case law
7i criteri di bilanciamento CEDU

You don't delete the article, you delete the name

On 5 August 2026 the CNIL clarified the boundaries of a right that is often exercised and widely misunderstood. Against a press organisation, objection and erasure remain available; access and rectification do not. And a refusal must be reasoned concretely: six generic formulas are named as inadmissible.

Aug 05, 2026New 4 min
Case law
3condizioni cumulative del test

Legitimate interest is not the fallback legal basis

In Case C-621/22 the Court of Justice held that a commercial interest can constitute a legitimate interest under Article 6(1)(f). Many people read only that line. The rest of the judgment recalls that the conditions remain three and cumulative, and that the third - the balancing against the data subject's reasonable expectations - is where the case at hand was lost. For the DPO the consequence is practical: legitimate interest exists only if it is written down somewhere.

Aug 12, 2026New 6 min