Search results

the free movement of such data (OJEU L 119/1 of 4 May 2016) (hereinafter AVG) became applicable (cf. Article 99(1) and (3) AVG). As of that date, the AVG

approved appeal of Article 5(1)(a), Article 12(1), Article 13(1) and Article 13(2). The appeal for Article 5(1)(c), Article 6(1) and Article 8 GDPR was not approved

some of the provisions of the GDPR and the "loi informatique et libertés". Regarding, on one hand, the violation of the GDPR, the CNIL reminded the Ministry

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

case fell under the household exception found in Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. According to this provision, the GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data

considering that it has violated the provisions of Article 17 of the GDPR and Article 21 of the GDPR and urge GLOBAL CAPITAL GROUP SPAIN, S.L. with NIF

information under Article 13 GDPR is illegal. Consequently, the APED decided to issue a fine of €1.500 for the violation of Article 13 GDPR. Share your comments

decision under Article 66 GDPR when the lead SA fails to respond to provide mutual assistance within a month as per Article 61(8) GDPR. The CJEU adopted

6(1)(b), 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(c) GDPR? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) deemed itself competent under Article 58(2) GDPR in conjunction with Article 47 of the Spanish Data

unlawful processing data from a public registry without a legal basis under Article 6 GDPR. A citizen filled a complaint with the AEPD regarding the unlawful processing

consent, in line with Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. The Court recalled that Article 31 of the Croatian Law on the Implementation of the GDPR stipulates that the

the combined provisions of article 32, paragraph 1, subparagraphs b) and d) and article 83, paragraph 4, al.a), of the GDPR, with a fine of € 0.00 to €

been stated nor has it been proven. 3.11. The GDPR also has a jurisdiction regulation. Article 79(2) of the GDPR provides that proceedings against a controller

minimisation under Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, and contrary to the obligation to obtain the freely given consent of the data subject under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR, when refusal

officer, article 39 of the RGPD attributes to him the function of cooperate with said authority. Similarly, the domestic legal system, in article 65.4 of the

RETAIL S.L. for alleged infringement of Article 5.1 f) of the GDPR, in accordance with Article 83.5.a) of the GDPR- Initiate sanctioning procedure against

referred to the provision of Art. 15 (4) GDPR. With regard to the respondent's reference to the provision of Art. 15 (4) GDPR, however, it should be noted that

had a legal basis under Article 6(1) GDPR to publish the data subject’s personal data, and did not violate Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. In the decision, the Croatian

constitutes sensitive data within the meaning of Article 9 GDPR. The DPA alluded to Article 9(1) GDPR which prohibits the processing of these special categories

unequivocal consent to the processing of his personal data according to Article 4(11) GDPR. The AEPD noted that to determine whether FEDA, having regard to the