Search results

prohibited by Article 9(1) of the GDPR. In order to process such data, the controller should have validly relied in one of the exceptions from Article 9(2). However

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

accordance with article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 The GDPR defines

the GDPR. The dental practise violated the GDPR by not informing the DPA of the data breach within 72 hours and, thereby, violated Article 33 GDPR. The

IMPOSE Ms. B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of the Article 5.1.c) and 13 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 a) and b) of the RGPD, a fine

***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 6.1 and another of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 letters a) and b) of the RGPD, a fine of €1,500 (€1

referred to in Article 33(1) of the AVG.15 15 File note 1, Notification of personal data breach 7-2-2019. P 5. 3.4.3 Assessment Article 33(1) of the AVG provides

of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD typified in Article 83.5.a) of the RGPD and considered very serious, for the purposes of prescription, in Article 72.1.a)

foundation was responsible for violating Article 33 GDPR, and issued it with a warning pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. The AEPD did not find the former Secretary

infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, Article 33 of the RGPD, Article 25 of the RGPD and Article 32 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD

infringement of the GDPR, articles: -12 of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5.b) of the GDPR and 72.1.k) of the LOPDGDD, and -5.1.c) of the GDPR, in accordance

relation to the requirements prescribed by Article 12.1 of the GDPR (transparency obligation) and by Article 13 of the GDPR (right to information). The Head of

processing by the defendant can only be Article 6 (1) sentence 1 lit e) DSGVO (see b) or Article 6 (1) sentence 1 lit f) DSGVO (see c), the requirements

and application of Article 20.1 c) by the AEPD implies the exclusion of the weighting required by the legitimizing basis of Article 6.1.f) of the RGPD and

conditions of Article 6 (1) of the GDPR. This follows both from Article 21(1)(1)(2) of the GDPR, which refers to Article 6(1)(1)(e) and (f) of the GDPR as a possible

provision(s): Regarding 1) - Article 5(1)(a) and (c) and Article 6(1) of the Data Protection Basic Regulation - DSGVO, OJ No L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1. Re 2) (a) Section

within the 72-hour time limit mandated by Article 33(1). Did the secretariat of the DPA breach its data security obligations under Articles 32(1), 33(1), and

under Article 4(12) GDPR. Second, the AP found that PVV Overijssel was obliged to notify the data breach to the AP within 72 hours pursuant to Article 33(1)

breach and had failed to do so within the timeframe set out in Article 33(1) of the GDPR, meaning that the company had breached this provision. Consequently

the alleged infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, in accordance with the provisions of Article 83.5 of the RGPD and 72.1.i) of the LOPDGDD, considered