Freely given consent - bundling, imbalance, cookie walls
Freely given means a genuine choice and the ability to refuse or withdraw. Consent bundled with other matters (e.g. buying a service) is invalid; under Article 7 a consent request joined to other matters must be clearly distinguishable, and any infringing part is not binding. Consent should not be relied on where there is a clear imbalance, especially with a public authority (Recital 43) or in the employer–employee relationship. Cookie walls do not yield valid consent. Granularity is required - separate consent per purpose.
Consent must offer a genuine choice including the freedom to refuse or withdraw. Under Article 7, where a consent request is joined to other matters it must be clearly distinguishable, and any infringing part is not binding. The 'utmost account' is taken of whether performance of a contract is conditioned on consent to processing that is not necessary for that contract - and 'necessary for the performance of a contract' must be interpreted strictly.
Recital 43 says consent should not be relied on where there is a clear imbalance, in particular with a public authority. Regulators treat the employer–employee relationship as problematic because of subordination - there are very few circumstances where an employer should rely on employee consent.
- Bundled consent (tied to buying a service) is not freely given
- Cookie walls - requiring cookie acceptance to access content - give no genuine choice, so consent is invalid
- Article 7(4) uses 'inter alia', so tying to contracts is only one example of situations caught
- Granularity required: separate consent for each purpose, not one consent for a bundle
Key terms - quick answers
What is “Cookie walls”?
What is “Public authority”?
What is “Granularity”?
What is “Recital 43”?
Sources and study method
This independent lesson uses active recall, spaced retrieval and scenario practice. Read the full study method.