Search results

contemplated in article 83.2 of the RGPD and the article 76.2 of the LOPDGDD, with respect to the infraction committed by violating the established in article 5.1

provisions of article 83.1 of the GDPR. In order to determine the administrative fine to be imposed, the provisions of article 83.2 of the GDPR and article 76 of

infringements of Article 12, 13 and 14 of the GDPR only. A limited assessment which, according to Hungarian and Italian DPAs, was faulty. Article 13(2)(e) GDPR provides

Pursuant to Article 83 GDPR in conjunction with Article 4 No. 7 and 8 GDPR, fines for violations of the GDPR pursuant to Article 83(4) to (6) GDPR are not

objected to its processing pursuant to Article 21(1) of the GDPR (Article 17(1)(a), (c)(1) and (d) of the GDPR). A request for erasure would therefore

complained of, by virtue of the powers established in Article 58.2 of the RGPD and in Articles 47, 64.2 and 68.1 of the Organic Law 3/2018, of December 5,

pursuant to Article 17(2) DPA Act. 9. Moreover, as regards the one-stop-shop mechanism, Article 56 GDPR states: "Without prejudice to Article 55, the supervisory

infringement of Article 5.1 c) AVG has been proven. f)Transparent information (Article 5.1(a); Article 12.1. and Article 13.1. and 13.2. AVG) 43.The complainant

with article 4.1 of the RGPD, is a personal data. nal and its protection, therefore, is the subject of said regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

the GDPR does not apply established by the GDPR and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of articles 55 para. 1, 2 para. 1 and 3 para. 2 GDPR

for the violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR. The AEPD considered that the fine was proportional, since the GDPR establishes that fines

the documents or files containing their personal data under Article 15(3) GDPR and Article 12 of the ePrivacy Directive. However, there is a right to a

Supervision: Article 6(1)(f), legitimate interest. For the special category personal data: About diagnosis: Article 6(1)(a), cf. Article 9(2)(a), consent

investigations the CNIL found five breaches of the GDPR: -         Violation of the right to object, Article 21(2) GDPR: no procedure was implemented to ensure effectively

with the principles of article 5 par. 1 GDPR. It is no coincidence that the GDPR includes accountability (see Article 5 para. 2 GDPR) in the regulation of

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

persons pursuant to Article 34(1) GDPR. The Danish DPA found that Intervare did not go through with a proper assessment pursuant to Article 34(1), as it had

referred to Article 5(1)(a) (principle of lawfulness, fairness and transparency), Article 12(1), Article 7, Article 13 and Article 14 GDPR, the corresponding

company. In this case, it is not the consent referred to in Article 6(1)(a), Article 7 or Article 9(2)(a) of the Data Protection Regulation, but a separate permission

Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens disagrees: Article 78(2) GDPR defines the applicable time frame in line with Article 4:13(1) of the Dutch Administrative law