Search results

fine of €6,000 imposed for violation of Article 32 GDPR and a fine of €5,000 for the violation of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. Additionally instructed the erasure

the Foundation. The DPA held that the Foundation violated Article 33(1), Article 34(1) GDPR by failing to notify the DPA of a personal data protection

delay. It also issued a reprimand in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR and Article Article 100, §1, 5° WOG in addition to these corrective measures. It

basis pursuant to Article 6 GDPR. In the present judgement there seems to be a tension between the principle of accuracy (Article 5(1)(d) GDPR) and the principle

municipality €5,000 for failing to designate a DPO and to cooperate with the DPA, therefore violating Article 31 GDPR and Article 37(1)(a) GDPR. On 2 June

violation of the Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD and Article 32 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR and Article 83.4 of the GDPR. SECOND: APPOINT

analyzes the criteria by Article 83.2 of the GDPR: - As to the nature and seriousness of the violation [article 83.2 a) of the GDPR], with regard to breaches

es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 4/33 -9.2 of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5.a) of the GDPR and article 72.1.e) of the LOPDGDD. “ "For the purposes

the Arnhem Court of Appeal. 2.5. The text of the article about [A] on the black list of doctors is given below. The article is accompanied by a picture of

accordance with Article 33 AVG; - on the basis of Article 100, § 1, 5° WOG, issue a reprimand against the defendant for the infringement of Articles 5, 6 and 4

177/22), but there is already no violation of the GDPR. Para. 60 There is no violation of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR (regarding the following: LG Aachen judgment

compelling reasons within the meaning of Article 9 of the protocol on monitoring systems. That article reads as follows: "Article 9 Articles 05 to 08 do not affect

comply with Article 33 GDPR and Article 34 GDPR. Consequently, it issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. First, the

breach of Article 28 paragraphs 3 and 4 of the GDPR is clear. 2. On the breach of the obligation to ensure data security 49. According to Article 32 of the

municipality €409,768 (NOK 4,000,000) for breaches of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, Article 24 GDPR and Article 32 GDPR after a serious ransomware attack led to highly

DPA under Article 100 § 1, 6, 10 and 12 of the LCA. The complainant y also denounces a breach of Article 5.1. c) and Article 5.1. e) of the GDPR. 18. The

Authority of Bologna for violation of Articles 5(2)(f) and 9 GDPR. On the basis of Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 GDPR, the Garante imposed a fine of € 18 000 on

breached Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. Therefore, the DPA handed down a 'call to order' against the joint controllers for breaching Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, and no

breach (Article 83 (2) (h) of Regulation 2016/679) - about the infringements being the subject of this proceeding (Article 33 (1) and Article 34 (1) of

and (1)(e) of Article 6 GDPR. The violation of Article 2-ter of the Code is a direct consequence of the violation of Articles 5 and 6 GDPR. Finally, the