Search results

material scope of Article 2 no. 1 GDPR fundamentally requires that "personal data" be processed. The material scope of Article 2, number one, GDPR fundamentally

sedeagpd.gob.es, 8/10 In relation to letter k) of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, in its Article 76, “Sanctions and corrective measures”, establishes

DPA held that the controller had violated Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR, thus also Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, for lack of legal basis for publishing

sense of Article 82(1) GDPR, because the controller unlawfully disclosed the data to its customers. The court also held that under Article 82 GDPR the violation

administrative penalty fee: 1) Article 5, Paragraph 1, subparagraphs d and a; 2) Article 13; 3) paragraph 3 of Article 12; and 4) Article 15(1). Viking Line Oy

a breach of Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 13(1)(c) GDPR. The DPA found that the controller could not seek to rely on Article 6(1)(b) GDPR as a legal basis

of €10,000 under Article 82(1) GDPR for a violation of Articles 15 GDPR and 12(3) GDPR. The LAG held that a mere violation of the GDPR does not give rise

interpreted Article 16 in a broad sense in conjunction with the accuracy and accountability principles found in Article 5(1)(d) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR, respectively

for a violation of article 58.2 c) of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.6 of the GDPR, classified as very serious in article 72.1.m) of the LOPDGDD

whether Art. 15 GDPR applies to the investigation files at all, since according to Art. 2 Para. 2 d GDPR, Section 2a Para. 4 AO, the GDPR does not apply

Buchner, GDPR BDSG, 2nd edition 2018, Art. 5 GDPR marginal 8). Even if the data is “only” incorrect, the requirements of Article 17 (1) (d) GDPR can be met

Commission decision issued pursuant to Article 2 of this Article. Competence of the supervisory authority Article 56 of the General Data Protection Regulation

personal data according to Article 4(1) GDPR, and that the data subject had a right to erasure pursuant to Article 17(1)(d) GDPR. According to the OLG Dresden

according to Article 23 GDPR, restrictions of obligations and rights under Article 12 GDPR - Article 22 GDPR Article 34 GDPR and Article 5 GDPR, insofar as

applied Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, according to which the data subject could have voluntarily disclosed their health data defined in Article 4(15) GDPR to the

credit rating in breach of Article 6(1) GDPR, and required them to implement a policy for conducting credit ratings per Article 24 GDPR. The controller disagreed

of materiality is violated by the intervention in Article 2 Paragraph 1 in conjunction with Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law - GG. The lawsuit was

requirements of Article 34 (2) GDPR. If one sets too strict requirements for promptness within the framework of Article 34 Para. 1 GDPR, this would run

provide any justification (Article 21.2 GDPR and Article 21.3 GDPR) . The controller has within one month (Article 12.3 GDPR) after receipt of the complainant's

with the GDPR. In the context of the extended ex officio investigation, the DPA also found a violation of Article 12(6) GDPR and Article 12(2) GDPR on facilitating