Search results

subject's rights, such as the right to object according to Article 21 GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to ensure that data

provided for in Article 46(1) of the referred to Law. Finally, it is pointed out that in accordance with the provisions of Article 90.3 a) of the LPACAP

right of access under Article 15 GDPR? By denying the complainant access, did the respondent infringe Articles 12(1) or 12(2) GDPR? The NAIH that the complainant's

in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 1, preamble and under b, of the GDPR. 4.4. Article 6, paragraph 1, opening words, of the GDPR stipulates that processing

the basis of article 6.1 e) GDPR read together with articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR. 3) Violation of Articles 12.1, 12.6, 13.1 and 13.2 GDPR: the Inspection

obligation (Article 4:32 § 1 Wft). Therefore, Article 6(1)(c) GDPR was relevant. However, the Court highlighted that the phrase "at least on" in Article 6(1)

violated Article 12 GDPR, as it did not facilitate the data subject´s exercise of their rights, especially the right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR. In view

the LPACAP, for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SIXTH: On January 23, 2023, DIGI requests a

address traceable to the customer. 3.3. Information to interested parties With reference to what is represented in point 2.3. above, the Company, following

of the proceedings. 3.2. [applicant sub 1] et al bases the removal requests on Article 17 paragraph 1, under a, c and d, and Article 21 paragraph 1 of the

private doctor for violating Article 32 GDPR by making his patients' health data freely accessible on the web, and Article 33 GDPR by not notifying the DPA

Guarantor or to ask to be heard by the Authority (Article 166, paragraphs 6 and 7, of the Code; as well as Article 18, paragraph 1, of Law no. . 689 of 11/24/1981)

LGT, and the offenses typified in articles 38.3 c), d) and i) and38.4 d), g) and h) of Law 34/2002, of July 11, on services of the society of theinformation

process these data. Article 29 of the Croatian Labour Act and Article 5(4) of the Labour Law Rulebook (Official Gazette, no. 73/17) refer, among others

in particular of children was in breach of Article 5, Article 6, Article 8, Article 9, and Article 25 GDPR. Consequently, the DPA urgently imposed upon

articles 12.5 and 15.3 of the Regulation (UE)2016/679 and in the paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 13 of this organic law "FIFTH: The article 17 of the RGPD establishes

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, are a Personal data and its protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In the article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

data had taken place, meaning GDPR obligations did not apply. Are these magnetic cards personal data within Article 4(1) GDPR? If so, did the MCP infringe

information correctly published at the time. The DPA noted that under Article 17(3)(b) GDPR, personal data shall not be erased if their processing is necessary

the GDPR, as the data falls under Article 9 GDPR and awarded € 800 in emotional damages. The Austrian Business Code cannot override Article 9 GDPR. There