Is there a future for the anonymous blue parking disc?

Six years of litigation

As a resident of the municipality of Wageningen, Mr Ampt involved the Personal Data Authority (AP) because, as a certified privacy professional, he questioned the lawfulness of the municipality's processing of personal data in accordance with the AVG. In successive proceedings, this did not lead to the result he desired. Mr Ampt's case is supported by Privacy First.

Protection of citizens' interests

The stakes of the case have grown larger than just this municipality and only license plate parking and the acceptance of the blue parking disc because of the case law accumulated so far. This case also involves the obligation for the controller (municipality) to have a privacy impact assessment carried out and to include reasonable anonymous alternatives to processing in its implementation policy. All this has been lacking and has not been enforced by the AP.

Above all, this is about how the AP carries out its supervisory task. In Mr Ampt's view, the AP is making far too easy work of this. This is a flaw in the adequate protection of citizens' interests where the government processes personal data.

Case details

• Council of State Administrative Law Division, case number 202304226/1/A3
• Session date: Monday 28 July 2025 11:00am

Media

De Gelderlander 24 February 2023: Still enter license plate when parking ‘free’? Wageninger angrily goes to court
Net issues 20 July 2025: Peters Privacy Journal week 29, 2025: Anonymous parking
Domestic Administration 21 July 2025: Free parking by license plate breach of privacy?
Omroep Gelderland 26 July 2025: Gilles wants to be able to park anonymously and therefore takes it to State Council
De Gelderlander 27 July 2025: License plate parking versus blue card: Wageningen privacy battle now at Council of State

Update 19 February 2026

On 28 January this year, the Council of State pronounced in this case of the anonymous blue parking disc as an alternative to one-hour free badge parking. All three grounds of appeal were unfortunately rejected.

Gilles Ampt who brought this case against the Personal Data Authority says: “The most amazing thing about the ruling is that the State Council did not get the facts of the case right. The notice of appeal wrote out in full how all data of parkers is kept for much longer than the municipality claims. With publicly available source citations and all.” What is the case?

While the municipality only retains parking data for 48 hours in the parking meters, the National Parking Registry (NPR) retains all parking data on behalf of the municipality for 90 days (3 months) before anonymising the data and retaining it for the full 7 years (being the legal retention period of tax data).

Ampt continued: “At the hearing, the State Council did not bother to clarify this actively identified and documented discrepancy. The State Council apparently drew its own unsupported conclusions. This has major implications for the grounds of appeal.

Because the processing is not transparent and predictable for parkers, the legal basis for the processing is legally questionable. Similarly, by the letter of the AVG, this means systematic monitoring of location data. The implication is that there is then an obligation on the part of the processing municipality to carry out a privacy impact assessment (DPIA). To this day, this has not been done.”

And the blue parking disc? In the ruling, the Council of State manages to refer to the parking option with a blue parking zone a 3-minute walk away from the car parks with license plate parking. Not very convenient or realistic when you are shopping wholesale, the case discussed at length during the hearing. All in all, an inimitable and disappointing ruling. Gilles Ampt is still deliberating on possible next steps.