Search results

paragraph 3, all of article 35, and paragraph a) of paragraph 4 of article 83, all GDPR, with a fine of up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of annual turnover

until May 25, 2018, the treatment was subject to the HPPA. Applicable legislation has changed from the coming into force of the DMPP on May 25, 2018. 26

required by Article 35(3)(b). The AEPD also held that there had a been a violation of Article 32 because of a failure to comply with GDPR security measure

art. 24 sec. 1, art. 25 sec. 1, art. 28 sec. 1 and 3 and article. 32 sec. 1 and 2, as well as art. 83 sec. 1 - 3, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) and art. 83 sec

company was not compliant with Article 13 GDPR. The CNPD held that the controller infringed Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR and decided to: - impose

Spanish DPA (AEPD) fined XFERA MÓVILES, S.A. €40000 for violating Article 6(1) GDPR by illegally processing personal data of the claimants in a fraudulent

gave its non-binding opinion on the data protection roles under Article 4(7) and (8) GDPR of the entities involved in clinical trials in Slovenia , holding

their employees. The DPA found a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Following a visit to the premises of two public

States ”. The violation of article 32 of the RGPD is typified in article 83.4.a) of the aforementioned RGPD in the following terms: "4. Violations of the following

of a Commission decision on adequacy , or in Article 46, Article 47 or the second subparagraph of Article 49 (1) (a) the period for which the personal

regarding Article 6(1) GDPR and consent requirements regulated previously to GDPR. The fact that the infringements related to Article 25 GDPR did not include

data is a form of processing as referred to in the GDPR (article 4 sub 2 GDPR). Article 6 of the GDPR provides that the processing of personal data is only

space. The DPA found a violation of Article 6(1) GDPR and ordered the controller, pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, to adjust the location of the cameras

therefore an infringement of Article 5 at the time of the facts. 1, a) GDPR, Article 6, Article 12.1 GDPR and Article 14.1 a) GDPR. 90. In addition, a controller

a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Generally, a controller

comprehensible character, within the meaning of Article 12 of the GDPR, of the information provided for in Article 13 of the Regulation must be assessed. The

the RGPD must be observed. In turn, pursuant to article 83. 2.k GDPR, the circumstances described in article 76 LOPDGDD may also be taken into consideration

the data subjects, therefore breaching Article 6 GDPR, as well as Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. Thirdly, Article 30 GDPR stipulates that the controller must keep

2019, GDPR Art. 37, para. 1; Döpfler , EU-GDPR and BDSG, 2nd edition 2020, GDPR Art. 37, marginal 1; Paal / Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, 2nd ed. 2018, GDPR Art.

constitute personal data under Article 4(1) GDPR? If so, do they qualify as special categories of personal data under Article 9 GDPR? Is the defendant obliged