Search results

case of monocratic jurisdiction, there is administration (Muzak, B-VG6 Art 87 R 2 f). According to Article 87, paragraph 2, B-VG, a judge is “in the exercise

detailed presentation can be dispensed with in this respect. 2.2.3 Regarding W 258 2216873, the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG) in its decision of 30

AUGUST 2021 [doc. web n. 9685994] Order injunction against Deliveroo Italy s.r.l. - July 22, 2021 Record of measures n. 285 of 22 July 2021 THE GUARANTOR

random=1672750512146 &cv=11&fst=1672747200000&bg=fffff&guid=ON&async=1&gtm=2oabu0&u_w=1920 &u_h=1080&frm=0&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telekom.de%2Fstart &tiba=Teleko

this case was the complaint of the Bank [...] Spółka Akcyjna with its seat in W. against the decision of the President of the Personal Data Protection Office

person with NIPC 506204367 and headquarters at Rua de Sao Tomee Principe, 18 r/c Oto. , 2900-087 Setubal, dedicates itself to support for immigrants from

breach by TUiR WARTA SA with its seat in W., President of the Personal Data Protection Office,finding that TUiR WARTA SA with its seat in W. has breached

plaintiff (...) with its seat in W. purchased the debt from (...) Spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością S.K.A. with its seat in W. Party to the loan agreement

original for more details. 1/7  File No.: TD / 00044/2021 RESOLUTION NO: R / 00423/2021 Considering the claim made before this Agency by A.A.A. (hereinafter

that AEPD R/02863/2016 of December 14 - Procedure No.: A/00242/2016-, R/02906/2015 of December 17 November- Procedure No.: A/00172/2015- or R/00001/2015

itself (cf. BVerfG, resolution of 21 April 2015 - 2 BvR 1322/12, 2 BvR 1989/12 -, juris recital 52 m. w. N.; SächsOVG, decision of 29. April 2020 - 3 B 144/20

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 2 . 1 2 . 2 0 2 1 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 7 4 2 2 4 6 3 5 5 - 1/2 0 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court recognizes

Division heard the case on 15 January 2019, where the Board, represented by W.J.R. Krol and L. Schieving, and [appellant under 2], represented by [agent],

Court of August 22, 2019, Zl. W256 2213660-1/4E, regarding a data protection matter (participating parties: 1. C GmbH in W, represented by Dr. Friedrich

BRUSSELS, JosephStevensstraat7, fifth applicant, 6. LIGUE DES DROITS HUMAINS V.Z.W. c/o, with registered office at 1000 Brussels, Kogelstraat 22, but choosing

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 0 . 1 2 . 2 0 2 1 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 7 4 2 2 4 2 6 3 8 - 1/1 0 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court recognizes

DECISIONS D A T U M 0 7 . 1 2 . 2 0 2 1 BUSINESS NUMBER W 1 0 1 2 2 0 8 2 3 8 - 1/5 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court, through

Court of Finance, judgement of 26 June 2019, 11 LA 274/18. 19 March 2013, II R 17/11, loc. cit., decision of 15 September 2010, II B 4/10; regarding the InsO:

[place of residence], plaintiffs by subpoena dated June 2, 2020, lawyers mr. W. Brussee in The Hague and mr. S. van Londen in Hilversum, against the legal

no further payment stoppages or defaults (BVwG W 2 58 2216873-1 on a similar case; confirmed by BVwG W274 22 3 2028-1). The age of the claim or the point