Skip to main content
Data Protection / GDPR

Prohibition of bundling

The prohibition of bundling forbids making the performance of a contract conditional on a data protection consent that is not necessary for that service, thereby safeguarding the freely given nature of consent.

The prohibition of bundling (Koppelungsverbot) is a core element of freely given consent under the General Data Protection Regulation. It prohibits making the performance of a contract or the provision of a service conditional on the data subject consenting to the processing of personal data that is not in fact necessary for performing that contract. The legal basis is Art. 7(4) GDPR, which requires that, when assessing whether consent is freely given, "utmost account" be taken of whether such bundling exists. Where consent is not freely given, it is invalid and any processing based on it is unlawful.

The decisive line is drawn between data strictly required to perform the contract and data the controller wishes to process for additional purposes, such as advertising, profiling or disclosure to third parties. Processing necessary for the contract does not require consent at all; it relies on Art. 6(1)(b) GDPR. If, beyond this, consent is demanded and effectively coerced because the contract will not be concluded without it, a prohibited bundling occurs. The European Data Protection Board interprets the rule strictly: the data subject must be able to refuse or withdraw consent without suffering any detriment.

The prohibition of bundling is not, however, an absolute ban but a strong presumption against the consent being freely given. In exceptional cases bundling may be permissible where the data subject is offered a genuine, equivalent alternative without consent, for example an equivalent paid offer alongside an ad-funded one ("pay or consent" models). The controller bears the burden of proving that consent is freely given. In practice, separate and granular consent declarations, clear information about optionality and an easy withdrawal mechanism are decisive for complying with the prohibition and avoiding fines and civil liability.

Legal Basis

Art. 7(4) GDPR in conjunction with Art. 4(11) and Art. 6(1)(a) GDPR; Recital 43 GDPR

Practical Example

An online retailer wants customers to consent at registration, by a single blanket tick, to receiving newsletters and to having their data shared with advertising partners, and otherwise blocks checkout. The data protection officer identifies this as a breach of the prohibition of bundling: the marketing consent is not necessary to fulfil the contract. She decouples the two processes so that a purchase is possible without marketing consent, while the newsletter is obtained through a separate, non-pre-ticked opt-in box. This keeps the consent freely given and demonstrably valid.

FAQ

No. Bundling is prohibited where the consent requested is not necessary to perform the contract. Art. 7(4) GDPR creates a strong presumption against consent being freely given, which the controller can only rebut if the person is offered a genuine, equivalent alternative.
Coerced consent is not freely given and is therefore invalid. Any processing based on it is unlawful and may be sanctioned by the supervisory authority with fines under Art. 83 GDPR. Injunctive claims and claims for damages may also arise.
Separate contract-necessary processing from optional purposes such as advertising. Obtain consent separately, granularly and through an active opt-in, inform users about its optional nature, and allow an easy withdrawal at any time without detriment.

How preeco supports you

Learn how our software supports you with this topic.

Learn more