Search results

DPA held that a CCTV system shall be handled as subject to Article 4(1) and Article 4(2) of GDPR Regulation. That judgment does not mean that any CCTV surveillance

by the EDPB pursuant to Article 66(2) GDPR. Temporary ban on processing (order) Pursuant to Article 66(1) GDPR and 58(2)(f) GDPR the Norwegian DPA consequently

the meaning of Article 4(7) GDPR. Furthermore, the erasure or destruction of personal data is a form of processing based on Article 4(2) GDPR. The DPA has

c), Article 6.1., Article 13.1. c), Article 13.1. c), Article 13.1. e) and Article 13.2. a) of the DGPS pursuant to Article 101 of the ICA, to impose

violated Article 5(1)(e) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant

The heading of Article 6(1) and the wording “has given” in Article 6(1)(a) support this interpretation. It follows logically from Article 6 and Recital

” Regarding section k) of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", provides: "2. In accordance with the provisions

regarded as an access request under Article 15(1) GDPR. According to Recital 63 GDPR, the right of access under Article 15 GDPR serves data subjects to be informed

life insurance company had breached Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 9 GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR as its as its practice was to process

provisions Article 4.11: Consent (definition) Article 4.12: Violation of personal data (definition) Article 5.2: Principle of accountability Article 6.1.a:

under Article 77 GDPR was very clear and limited in scope. However, the DSB went on to assert a violation of Article 12 GDPR and Article 15(1)(h) GDPR, acting

Ordinance Article 6 No. 1 letter f, for failure to assess protests, cf. Article 21, and for lack of information, cf. Article 13. 2. Pursuant to Article 58 (2)

breached Article 6(1)(f) GDPR for lack of legal basis, Article 21 for lack of considering an objection, Article 13 for lack of information and Article 24 for

did not react either. GDPR applicable? (Article 3(2) GDPR) The DPA held that the GDPR was applicable pursuant of Article 3(2) GDPR. Because the controller

registered letter in violation of article 15 (1) cond. 12 par. 2, 3 and 4 GDPR and c) 30,000 euros for violation of Article 25 (1) GDPR because it did not in practice

processed on the basis of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR does not have the rights to erasure and objection contained in Article 17 and Article 21 GDPR respectively. This

guaranteed human rights. This right is explicitly enshrined in Article 38. In Slovenia the GDPR is not implemented by the national law. Slovenia remains the

that the letter in question referred to Article 58(1)(a) of the GDPR and Article 5:16 in conjunction with Article 5:17 of the Awb does not make this any

right to access under Article 15 GDPR because the controller was entitled to reject the request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The court reasoned that

which are provided for in Article 32 GDPR and Article 32 of VIS Regulation. Further security requirements are provided for in Article 9 of Council Decision