Search results

parent's request, thus violating Article 15(1) and (4) GDPR as well as the principle of accountability pursuant to Article 5(2) GDPR. The complainant requested

violated Article 6 and Article 32 GDPR. The DPA seems to consider the authentication procedure itself as "processing" and therefore Article 32 GDPR applies

...................... .11 2.2.1 Applicable regulations, etc. ................................................ ...11 2.2.2 The Privacy Protection Authority's

this regulation in accordance with Article 57 (1) (a) GDPR and which has the powers in accordance with Article 58 GDPR. For this reason alone, there was

provided for in Article 56(1), read in conjunction with Article 56(2), read in conjunction with Article 56(3), read in conjunction with Article 56(4), read

cookies, as per Article 22(2) Spanish Law on Information Society Services (LSSI). This law regulates cookies, connected to Article 13 GDPR. The decision

IMPOSE COMMUNITY OWNERS B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, a fine of ONE THOUSAND

A.A.A., herein the data controller, violated Article 6 GDPR and Article 13 GDPR, as well as Article 22.2 LSSI (Spanish national law). The data subject

violation of data minimisation, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. No fines can be imposed against the controller and Article 83(5) GDPR can therefore not be imposed.

data Article 9.2.a: Explicit consent Article 9.2.b: Execution of labor law obligations etc. Article 9.2.c: Protection of vital interests Article 9.2.d: Edit

Data Protection Agency sanction B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 13 of the RGPD, typified in the Article 83.5 of the RGPD, with a fine

which also refers to Article 34 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation. 3 (b). The Data Inspectorate should note that Article 34 (2) does. 3, points to the

Judiciales (JAVA). JAVA infringed Article 6(1)(a) GDPR by publishing illegal recordings on its website and also infringed Article 22(2) LSSI due to its cookie policy

contrary to the legal provisions established in article 22.2 LSSI. This Infraction is classified as "minor" in Article 38.4 g) of the aforementioned Law, and may

Policy on their website (Article 13 GDPR) and for the absence of a reject button on the second layer of their Cookie Policy (Article 22(2) LSSI). The claimant

company was not compliant with Article 13 GDPR. The CNPD held that the controller infringed Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR and decided to: - impose

Agency RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for an infraction of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a fine of

service in the terms required by article 22.2.”, and may be sanctioned with a fine of up to €30,000, in accordance with article 39 of the aforementioned LSSI

that under Article 82 (1) and (2) GDPR, any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of a violation of the GDPR is entitled

infringement of article 13) of the RGPD, regarding its Privacy Policy. b- 3,000 euros (three thousand euros), for the infringement of article 22.2) of the LSSI