Search results

accordance with the Personal Data Act 2018 or the Personal Data Act 2000. We have come to the conclusion that the Personal Data Act of 2018 must be applied in the

accordance with the Personal Data Act (2018) or the Personal Data Act (2000). The Personal Data Act (2018) § 33 first paragraph contains a special transitional

amended), and Article 7 (1) and (2), Article 60, Article 102 of the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data (Journal of Laws of 2010, No. 153,

the Spanish Data Protection Agency and based on the following FACTS FIRST: Mr. A.A.A. (*hereinafter, the claimant) on 27 May 2019 filed a complaint with

provisions of paragraph a) of paragraph 1 of article 5 and paragraph a) of paragraph 5 of article 83, both of the RGPD, with a fine of up to €20,000,000

in a lawful, fair and transparent manner towards the data subject, cf. 1. tölul. Paragraph 1 Article 8 Act no. 90/2018, on personal data protection and

of personal data in art. 5, 6, 7 and 9, cf. also the Personal Data Act 2018 § 26 second paragraph. The condition in the Personal Data Act 2018 § 33 The second

Scope of Act no. 90/2018, on personal data protection and the processing of personal data, and Regulation (EU) 2016/679, cf. Paragraph 1 Article 4 of the

with the Personal Data Act (2018) or the Personal Data Act (2000). There is a special transitional rule in the Personal Data Act (2018) § 33 first paragraph

violate Article 82 of the Data Protection Act? The DPA explained that Article 82 of the Data Protection Act required the provider to ask consent of data subjects

processing of service data by Google and thus failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR and Article 28(1) GDPR. Second

held a credit score is a decision for the purposes of Article 22(1) GDPR, where an action taken by a third party ‘draws strongly’ from it. A data subject

violating Article 5(1)(c) and 13 GDPR. On 1st of August 2022, the data subject submitted a complaint against a neighbor since he had installed a video surveillance

specified in the national data protection act (1050/2018). A legal issue The Deputy Data Protection Commissioner assesses and decides the initiator's case on the

complainant with the Data Protection Authority on 2 October 2018; Having regard to the decision of 26 October 2018 of the Data Protection Authority’s Frontline

enterprise, cf. Article 5 No. 2. e) any previous violations committed by the data controller or the data processor The Norwegian Data Protection Authority is

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 50b(1)

approved appeal of Article 5(1)(a), Article 12(1), Article 13(1) and Article 13(2). The appeal for Article 5(1)(c), Article 6(1) and Article 8 GDPR was not

infringement of article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the RGPD. SECOND: START A SANCTION PROCEDURE against NATURGY ENERGY GROUP, S.A. with NIF

personal data, in violation of Article 5, Article 6, and Article 25 GDPR. It ordered the controller to comply with the data subject's erasure request pursuant