Search results

The Privacy Appeals Board assessed if a fine could be imposed as per Article 83(5) GDPR, cf. Article 83(2) GDPR, and in which case, how large it should

with the criteria established in Article 83(2)(b) GDPR: negligent character of the infringement, and Article 83(2)(g) GDPR: categories of personal data affected

of the article 15 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, with a fine of €10,000 (ten thousand euros), and for a violation of article 17 of the

***NIF.1, in accordance with article 58.2.d) of the GDPR, for a violation of article 13 of the GDPR typified in article 83.5.b) of the aforementioned Regulation

violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Following a visit to the premises of two public bodies (the joint controllers)

criteria established in section 2 of the aforementioned article. 2. In accordance with the provisions of article 83.2.k) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may

32 sec. 2, art. 38 sec. 1, art. 39 sec. 1 lit. b and art. 39 sec. 2, art. 30 sec. 1 lit. d, as well as art. 83 sec. 1 - 3, art. 83 sec. 4 letter a and art

different functions, a permissive function (Article 88(1) GDPR) and a conditional function (Article 88(2) GDPR). While Article 88(2) GDPR determines the scope

RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE A.A.A., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of article 6 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, a fine of €10,000 (ten

do so (Article 15.1 combined with Article 12.3. of GDPR as well as Article 12.2. of the GDPR (obligation to facilitate the exercise of rights) - a breach

concluded that a fine of €2,000 be set for the infringement of Article 13 GDPR as defined in Article 83(5) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR the Spanish

had been no violation of Article 32(4) GDPR, and in the alternative, that: in accordance with the provisions of Article 83(2) GDPR, the BGN 1500 fine should

(Articles 58(2)(i) GDPR) & 83 GDPR) and, after having taken into consideration Article 83(2) GDPR's fine measuring principles and ARTICLE 29 Data Protection

Administrative offense (s) after: Article 5 (1) (a), Article 9 (1) and (2) in conjunction with Article 83 (1) and (5) (a) GDPR, OJ L 2016/119, 1 as amended

the principles found in Article 5 GDPR, in this case Article 5(1)(f) GDPR. In addition, Persónuvernd highlighted Article 32 GDPR as operationalising the

the court of appeal did not see a reason to reduce the fine on the basis of Article 83(2) GDPR and Article 6(1) and 6(3)(a) ECHR. Thus, the court of appeal

Training refers to it in point 64, as well as in Chapter II.2, Section 2.2 of this decision. 2.2 Regarding the requirement to provide information in an "easily

course of the audit proceeding to remedy the breaches of Article 38(1) GDPR and Article 39(1)(b) GDPR. The CNPD noted however that these measures were taken

elements according to Article 83 GDPR, the DPA imposed a fine in the amount of €18,000 for a violation of Article 5, 9, 32 GPDR and Article 157 of the Italian

limitation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR and against the provisions of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 6(1)(f) GDPR in conjunction with Article 6(4) GDPR. Further