Search results

it should be noted that Article 15 of Legislative Decree no. 33 of March 14, 2013, no. 33 regulates the publication obligations concerning the holders

addition, again in the two-year period, the Company: "imposed 33 penalties" in relation to "33 conduct that did not comply with the provisions of the mandate

Spanish administrative law were invoked, leading to a reduced fine of EUR 33.000. On 26/12/2018 AEPD received a complaint against XFERA MOVILES, S.A (YOIGO)

not strictly necessary for the purpose pursued, and therefore excessive. 33. 33. Nevertheless, it notes that the Company has, prior to the initiation of

photos showing the plaintiff and bearing his name, the defendant infringed Sec. 33 of the German Data Protection Act (DSG) as well as Sec. 78 of the Copyright

further surveys. In addition, the discrepancy includes 43 document titles about 33 employees from 2018 - 2019. The breach personal data security has arisen as

adopted on 29 November 2017 by the Group 29, p. 9-10. Page 33 Substance decision 34/2020 - 33/35 107. Fourth, it should be noted that the retention period

legal basis for making the decisions is the Personal Data Act 2018 § 26, cf. § 33, cf. Personal Data Act 2000 § 46. On the basis of the Directorate of Customs'

EU:C:2021:504, paragraph 61, judgment Nowak, C-434/16, EU:C:2017:994, paragraph 33 and judgment Rijkeboer, C-553/07, EU:C:2009:293, paragraph 59. Page 14 of

municipality "for fifteen consecutive days, unless specific provisions of law". 33/2013, which - respectively - provide that "data, information and documents

as required by Article 33 GDPR. For the purposes of this Penalty Notice, the Commissioner does not rely on any breach of Article 33 GDPR and any prior finding

complaint against companies AMPNI and EY Greece for alleged violations of Article 33 GDPR. According to the complainant people related to the defendants entered

"Robinson List" regardless of the contractual obligation. According to Article 33(2) of the Spanish data protection law (LOPDGDD), Raise Marketing is responsible

public authority. This is underpinned by the differentiated regulation in Art. 33 and 34 of the GDPR regarding the notification obligations towards the authority

effects of the PDB and has duly complied with the requirements of Article 33(3) of the GDPR.   DECISION According to Article 83 (4) (a) of the GDPR, the

notified the Romanian DPA of the data security breach pursuant to Article 33 GDPR, prompting an investigation by the DPA. The investigation revealed that

Regulations of 15 December 2000 no. 1265. (2018) § 33. According to the Personal Data Act (2018) § 33, the rules «which applied at the time of action» shall

number. Furthermore, the defendant violated the obligation set out in Art. 33 GDPR to inform the competent supervisory authority in the event of a data

legal prosecution. and dismiss the defendant's appeal. The defendant requests,,33The defendant requests, 34 rejecting the plaintiff's appeal, the judgment of

country transfers must be assessed based on its specific legal context (point 33). 7 The security-enhancing measures mainly consist of the responsibility for