Search results

morespecifically the articulation between article 15.4 of the GDPR and recital 63 of the GDPR, as well asbalancing the right to access and obtain data against

of the GDPR. 92. 92. Firstly, the restricted formation emphasises that, in this case, the criterion provided for in Article 83(2)(a) of the GDPR relating

meaning of the GDPR, and such processing of personal data did not fall within the scope of the "household exemption". Therefore, the GDPR applied in full

Ambuce held that it's rights of defence and article 92(3) WOG were not respected by the DPA. A number of GDPR violations were found in the contested decision

article 12, second paragraph, of the GDPR. 78. Recital 59 of the GDPR further clarifies the standard in Article 12 of the GDPR: “There should be arrangements

can in itself be considered justified pursuant to recital 47 of the AVG. in accordance with recital 47 of the AVG. Consequently, the first condition laid

protection of Art. 82 GDPR does not cover violations of Art. 13, 14, 15, 24, 25 and Art. 34 GDPR. In addition, there is no breach of the GDPR by the defendant

understood as references to the GDPR, in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. 34. Similarly, it follows from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

understood as made to the GDPR , in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. Similarly, it appears from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

243. In order to strengthen the enforcement of the rules of the GDPR, recital 148 GDPR clarifies that penalties, including administrative fines, should

Schecke and Eifert, C-92/09 and C-93/09, EU:C:2010:662, para. 47; judgment of 24 November 2010, Volker and Markus Schecke and Eifert, C-92/09 and C-93/09, EU:C:2010:662

Article 6.1 GDPR, read in conjunction with Articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR; 5) the performance of a data protection impact assessment (Article 35 GDPR) the framework

of the GDPR according to Art. 99 Para. 2 GDPR as of May 25, 2018 follows from Art. 79 Para. 2 Sentence 1 GDPR in conjunction with recital 22 GDPR as well

1 b) GDPR) and the legality of the processing (Article 6.1 GDPR); as well • compliance with the responsibility of the controller (Article 24 GDPR), security

4 No. 1 GDPR. The query of this date in the order form on the plaintiff's homepage is also a processing operation within the meaning of the GDPR. Because

processing of personal data is carried out in accordance with the GDPR. In doing so, the GDPR requires, among other things, that the nature and scope of the

Article 17(1)(d) GDPR since the data was unlawfully processed. The defendant claimed that its activities fall under exception in (Article 85 GDPR) read in conjunction

2.1.2. The scope of the GDPR and the jurisdiction of the Disputes Chamber34. In principle, the defendant argues that the GDPR would not apply in thisfile

article 82(1) GDPR, asking for the data controller to be held liable for the damage caused to them by the data processing which infringed the GDPR. Should a

point b) GDPR and Article 100, §1, 5 ° WOG to be reprimanded for the infringement of Article 25 (1) GDPR; b. on the basis of Article 83 GDPR and Articles