Search results
From GDPRhub
- 4, 5 and 6 are, in each case, effective, proportionate and dissuasive. 2. Depending on the specific characteristics of each case, administrative fines are93 KB (14,936 words) - 17:09, 6 December 2023
- there is no case number (e.g. because the case was not published or a court or DPA does not use case numbers) you can us a case name. If the case was not published17 KB (2,638 words) - 11:18, 19 February 2024
- List of results by case List of documents Search result: 1 case(s) 1 documents analysed Deutsche WohnenCase C-807/21 Reports of Cases Information not available7 KB (936 words) - 16:39, 12 December 2023
- personal data because they allowed users to be identified even though this case was concerning collection and identification of IP addresses by internet9 KB (1,113 words) - 13:10, 1 June 2023
- information agency already to be regarded as pursuing a legitimate interest in the case where it imports data from the public register without a specific reason15 KB (2,180 words) - 08:23, 13 December 2023
- Directive, what factors are relevant in determining whether in any given case such script is personal data, and what weight should be given to such factors6 KB (766 words) - 21:17, 5 March 2024
- Article 34 shall be provided free of charge. In the case of manifestly unfounded or, in particular in the case of frequent repetition, excessive requests by51 KB (8,592 words) - 07:03, 2 November 2021
- 0105 Oslo, Norway). The DPA will reconsider the case. If it upholds its decision it forwards the case, all relevant documents and a transmission letter5 KB (427 words) - 15:48, 24 January 2022
- 16 July 2020 in case C-311/18, Schrems II, paragraphs 101 and 105. [2] Judgment of the European Court of Justice of 16 July 2020 in case C-311/18, Schrems75 KB (11,733 words) - 16:33, 21 August 2022
- Chromebook case Date: 18-08-2022 Decision Public authorities Prohibition Reported breach of personal data security In a much publicized case about the use117 KB (18,075 words) - 10:19, 12 September 2022
- each individual case. Each supervisory authority must ensure that the imposition of administrative penalty charges in each individual case are effective113 KB (12,773 words) - 15:20, 6 December 2023
- The first major case that the Supreme Court of Norway decided on regarding the right to privacy was To mistenkelige personer (Two Suspicious Individuals)8 KB (1,064 words) - 12:53, 23 June 2023
- be. It appears from the case documents that X AS and the Trade Union disagree somewhat on the facts of the case. Although the case before the tribunal concerns31 KB (5,018 words) - 18:44, 5 March 2022
- exclusively stood up on behalf of the State in the present case and in the cases with case numbers C/10/576071 / HA RK 19-693, C/10/576074 / HA RK 19-69414 KB (2,154 words) - 16:27, 10 March 2022
- factually differentiated this case from Facebook Ireland C-311/18. In comparison to this case, Facebook Ireland is a case where the export of personal data9 KB (1,191 words) - 08:44, 23 January 2024
- particular case, given the interests represented and the scope of the case, a decision as soon as possible is desirable. In the present case, the Chamber19 KB (2,707 words) - 16:50, 12 December 2023
- of natural persons and indicate what measures may be sufficient in such cases to address such risk. Recital 78: Appropriate Technical and Organisational31 KB (3,535 words) - 13:52, 4 July 2024
- receipt of the recurso. In practice, it will take 6 to 7 months and in most cases will not lead to a change of the decision. Appeal with the Superiour Administrative4 KB (386 words) - 15:29, 3 September 2021
- resumed processing of the case. It appears from the case documents that the Data Inspectorate, in the period they have worked on the case, has been contacted144 KB (23,058 words) - 18:48, 5 March 2022
- GDPR A4, GDPR A5 (1) Judge Thyness: Questions and background of the case (2) The case concerns the validity of the Privacy Board's decision of 21 January46 KB (7,024 words) - 06:18, 6 March 2022