This is the family of cases with the highest deletion rate in the published record: seven of the eleven decisions ended with the data removed. The reason is structural. A contractual quarrel or a custody fight does not become a matter for international police cooperation because one side persuaded a prosecutor to open a file, and the Commission says so in almost every one of these decisions.
Breach of contract is not a crime
Two 2017 decisions set the pattern. In the first, the applicant had signed a cheque on behalf of his company that was not honoured; nothing in the file explained how he could have known it would not be honoured, or how signing it constituted fraud rather than a failure to perform a contract. In the second, the allegation was in substance a claim of breach of contract, and no facts showed the applicant’s own participation in any offence as head of the company. In both, the minimum criteria for a Red Notice under Article 83(1)(a)(i) of the RPD were held not to be met.
The question the Commission asks is narrow and answerable: which act, by this person, is said to be criminal rather than commercial — and what shows the intent?
Unfunded cheques
Dishonoured cheques are criminalised in several jurisdictions, and they generate a disproportionate share of Red Notices against businesspeople. The published decisions treat them sceptically. In a 2019 case the Commission noted that the amount still outstanding was smaller than the sum originally loaned and that nothing indicated malicious or fraudulent intent; the mere act of issuing an unfunded cheque, without demonstrated intent, did not meet the criterion of interest for international police cooperation.
Custody disputes and Yellow Notices
A Yellow Notice is for locating a missing person, and that purpose is spent once the person’s whereabouts are known. Three decisions turn on it:
- Where the requesting authorities had themselves discussed the children’s location with the bureau of the country they were in, the notices had achieved their purpose — the fact that the children were not under the father’s guardianship did not make them unlocated.
- Where the other country had confirmed the children’s location and their status with their custodian, and the requesting bureau gave no concrete answer about any continuing purpose, the notices failed Article 90 of the RPD.
- Where courts in two countries had granted custody to different parents, the Commission held that INTERPOL is not the forum for competing custody disputes and left the questions of custody and extradition to the national authorities.
The counter-example matters too: in a 2024 decision the data were aimed at locating rather than arresting the mother, and could reasonably be understood to serve notification and to secure her presence before the court, so they were maintained.
Arguments that did not work
- Conviction in absentia, where a retrial is available. Copies of all five judgments showed proper procedure and the possibility of a fresh trial in the applicant’s presence with counsel of his choosing.
- Unfair-trial claims resting on political motivation. Without precise elements about the investigation or the procedure to follow after extradition, no flagrant denial of fair-trial rights was demonstrated.
- A co-accused’s extradition being refused. A refusal on a country-specific ground is not a ruling on the merits and does not stop the notice serving its purpose.
The decisions
The eleven published decisions whose reasoning turns primarily on a private, commercial or family dispute. Related grounds are covered on the data quality and seriousness page and the Article 3 page.
11 decisions
-
Private matter · Unfunded cheques
Signing a cheque that could not be honoured, without any clear explanation of how that amounted to a criminal offence rather than a breach of contract, does not justify a Red Notice: the minimum criteria of Article 83(1)(a)(i) of the RPD were not met.
Concludes that the data challenged is not compl iant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data;
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Private matter
The conduct alleged amounted to a private commercial dispute — a claim of breach of contract — and no facts were supplied showing the applicant's effective personal participation in a criminal offence as head of the company.
Concludes that the data challenged is not compl iant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data;
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Family matter · Lawfulness-Validity of proceedings
Yellow Notices exist to locate a missing person. Where the requesting authorities already knew where the children were, having discussed it with the other bureau, the notices had achieved their purpose; the fact that the children were not under the father's guardianship did not make them unlocated.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data challenged concerning the Applicant and the Children are not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be d
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
International interest-Seriousness · Trial in absentia · Unfunded cheques
Copies of all five court decisions showed the applicant's possible personal participation, the proper conduct of national procedure and the possibility of a fresh trial in his presence with counsel of his choosing, so the due-process objection to conviction in absentia failed.
Decides that the data challenged are compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data.
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Due process · International interest-Seriousness · Unfunded cheques
The conclusions of another state's independent judicial body about the risks the applicant would face on extradition cannot be ignored; together with doubts about the interest of the data for police cooperation, retention was incompatible with the spirit of the Universal Declaration.
Decides that the data challenged are not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from INTERPOL’s files.
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Family matter
INTERPOL is not the forum for competing custody disputes: where courts in two countries had granted custody to different parents, the Commission could not find retention of the data compliant and left custody and extradition to the national authorities.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data concerning the Applicant and the Child are not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from IN
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Access to files · Lawfulness-Validity of proceedings · Private matter
A claim of unfair trial resting mainly on alleged political motivation, without precise elements about flaws in the investigation or in the procedure to be followed after extradition, does not demonstrate a flagrant denial of fair-trial rights.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data challenged are compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data.
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Unfunded cheques
Issuing an unfunded cheque, where the outstanding sum was smaller than the amount originally loaned and nothing showed malicious or fraudulent intent, does not meet the criterion of interest for international police cooperation.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data concerning the Applicant are not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from INTERPOL’s files
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Lack of action for extradition · Private matter
A refusal of extradition on a ground specific to one country is not a determination on the merits and does not by itself affect compliance; a refusal concerning an alleged accomplice does not prevent the notice from still serving its purpose.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data challenged are compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, subject to the following update of the Applicant’s file: any referen
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Due process · Family matter · International interest-Seriousness · Purpose
Where the data aim at locating rather than arresting the person, and may reasonably be understood to serve notification and to secure her presence before the court that may later hear the case, the standard relied on under the ICCPR was met.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COMMISSION Decides that the data challenged are compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data.
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
-
Family matter · International interest-Seriousness · Ne bis in idem · Purpose
Yellow Notices lost their purpose under Article 90 of the RPD once the other country had confirmed the children's location and their status under their custodian's guardianship, and the requesting bureau gave no concrete answer on any continued purpose.
[xxx] Decides that the data concerning the Applicant s are not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from INTERPOL’s files .
Download decision (PDF) Source: INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
No decisions match these filters.
What this means for an application
Bring the commercial or family record, not the criminal one: the contract and its performance history, the accounting of what was owed and repaid, the civil claim if one exists, the custody orders from both countries. Then ask the Commission the narrow question — what act of mine is criminal rather than contractual, and where is the intent? Our lawyers prepare these applications and, where an arrest is imminent, the request to block access while the review runs: see how a challenge is built.
Private and family disputes: common questions
Can a Red Notice be based on a business dispute?
It should not be. The published decisions repeatedly hold that conduct amounting to a breach of contract is a commercial matter, and that a Red Notice requires facts showing a criminal offence and the person’s own participation in it. Seven of the eleven decisions in this family ended with the data deleted.
I am accused over a dishonoured cheque. Is that a ground?
It is one of the strongest. The Commission has held that issuing an unfunded cheque, without demonstrated malicious or fraudulent intent — and where the outstanding sum was less than the amount originally lent — does not meet the requirement of interest for international police cooperation.
Can INTERPOL be used in a custody fight?
A Yellow Notice may be used to locate a child, but its purpose ends when the location is known. The Commission has also said plainly that INTERPOL is not the forum for competing custody decisions from two countries, and has left those questions to national courts.
Does a conviction in absentia make the notice non-compliant?
Not by itself. Where the requesting country produced the judgments and showed that a fresh trial in the person’s presence, with counsel of their choosing, remains available, the due-process objection failed.
My co-accused had his extradition refused. Does that help me?
Not directly. A refusal on a ground specific to the refusing country is not a decision on the merits of the case and does not prevent the notice from continuing to serve its purpose against you.