Anonymised case study
Privacy: identifying a specific criminal act
One complaint raised potential implications for privacy in a context of personal relationships and communications. The parties maintained contradictory versions.
Read moreServices
To specify the access, use and dissemination of information.
We examined how the information was obtained, what authorization existed and what use or dissemination is attributed. We preserve the original supports and distinguish personal or civil conflicts from conduct that may have criminal relevance.
The crimes of discovery and unlawful disclosure of private information have specific elements. Contradictory versions require contrast; an investigation should be relevant and not an undetermined search for possible infringements.
Understanding to Decide
Anonymised case study
One complaint raised potential implications for privacy in a context of personal relationships and communications. The parties maintained contradictory versions.
Read moreSupreme Court · Second Chamber
Supreme Court · Second Room · 2026
The court upheld liability for inducing disclosure of confidential data and for bribery, while reducing the sentence for particularly serious undue delay. The official note distinguishes the offences and the mitigation.
ECLI:ES:TS:2026:1301
Read moreSupreme Court · Second Room · 2025
The plenary court upheld organised-trafficking convictions and examined communications intercepted under judicial authority in France and introduced through a European Investigation Order. It considered their acquisition, transmission and attribution to the defendants.
ECLI:ES:TS:2025:4526
Supreme Court · Second Room · 2022
The court set aside a conviction where medical data obtained without consent or judicial authorisation had enabled investigators to identify and link the defendant to the events. It examined whether the remaining evidence was sufficient.
ECLI:ES:TS:2022:4754
Answers to guide you
18 Brief answers with references to official regulations.
It can be if the elements of the discovery of secrets or other type come together. Personal or partner relationship is not a general authorization.
Not necessarily. The actual authorization, its scope and conduct must be examined. Technical access capacity does not resolve your lawfulness.
Yes, depending on the form and purpose of the access and the data affected. An earlier relationship does not legitimize entering into their private communications.
Yeah. Some modalities punish typical discovery or access without requiring subsequent disclosure. The specific assumption must be identified.
Yes, in the cases of article 197.7. Consent to obtain or send to a person does not amount to consenting to any dissemination.
It can do so in the terms of the article 197.7, depending on how it was received, knowledge and dissemination. There should be no impunity for not recording it.
No. Access must be legitimately justified. Having computer work permits does not authorize personal consultations outside their functions.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗Yeah. Protected information, authorisation and specific access should be analysed. There is no need for an economic purpose.
Yeah. Clandestine recruitment in intimate spaces may include an offence, depending on the circumstances and legal requirements.
No. The ownership of the media does not remove other people's rights to intimate data, communications or images.
It cannot simply be equated with intercepting another's conversation. Content, circumstances, subsequent use and rights affected should be studied.
It may be possible if they are relevant and legitimately obtained. The defence and the judicial body must value privacy, integrity and evidentiary purpose.
Article 201 establishes a complaint regime with exceptions. The type, the victim and the circumstances provided for by law must be checked.
You can have it when you use powers or public status in legal cases. The rating depends on what information is revealed and how it was obtained.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗Yeah. The unlawful disclosure of private information known by reason of profession or occupation can integrate the assumptions of the article 199.
Yes, if there is evidence of harm caused by the crime. Dissemination, scope and harm, including morals, should be documented.
Consult this service ↗See FAQ ↗URL, dates, original messages and dissemination evidence, avoiding unnecessarily forwarding them. The proof must be preserved in such a way as to verify its authenticity.
No. Technical recovery does not substitute for consent or other empowerment. Copying or disseminating protected data may be of criminal relevance.
Family and successions
In Matrimonialistas you will find information about related civil actions and claims.
Someone shares private material. Should you forward it to prove what happened? Further circulation can increase the harm. Preserve evidence without unnecessarily spreading the material.
Keep available information about publication, dates and recipients, and obtain advice about documenting the content. Do not access other people's accounts or obtain new copies unlawfully. If urgent protection is needed, ask about the appropriate removal and protection routes.
Privacy disputes do not all receive the same criminal-law response in Spain. How the material was obtained, its content and its distribution are relevant. If you are under investigation, preserve relevant files and communications without altering them or posting them online to defend yourself.
At penal.info, we assess the possible offence and claim or defence options. Explain what was obtained, how and who received it. That sequence helps us examine the case accurately.
Book an appointment with María Morales at penal.info.
Time to listen
Consult with María Morales Elbaz, lawyer in Madrid.