Search results

elements according to Article 83 GDPR, the DPA imposed a fine in the amount of €18,000 for a violation of Article 5, 9, 32 GPDR and Article 157 of the Italian

use of your data 21 GDPR, he did not explain to what extent the Data processing based on Article 6 Paragraph 1 Letter f of the GDPR is nevertheless not

it should have under Article 60 GDPR - Article 61(8) GDPR applied, which meant that the urgent need to act under Article 66(1) GDPR was presumed to be met

submits that Article 77 AVG 2, interpreted in the light of Articles 1, 51(1) and 57 AVG, recitals 7, 10 and 141 AVG, Article 8 Charter and Article 16 TFEU,

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

referred to in article 6 par. 1 GDPR. With reference, in particular, to the legal basis of the overriding legal interest (article 6 par. 1. f) GDPR), in Reason

conferred by article 79(2) of the GDPR. This is the relevant provision for the purposes of para 3.1(20) of CPR Practice Direction 3B. Article 79(2) provides:

breach of article 6 of the GDPR as well as article 12.3-4 of the GDPR, for reasons set out above ( Title II.1.2, points 12-13 and Title II.1.4, points

06/30/1934 DSG Art. 1 § 1 today DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid from 01.01.2014 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 51/2012 DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid from 01.01.2000

under Article 17 GDPR pursuant to Article 85 GDPR and a specific provision in Article 43(2) of the Dutch Data Protection Act that makes Article 17 GDPR

10. The conditions for "consent" are set out in UK GDPR Art 7. Article 7(1) states, relevantly: "1. Where processing is based on consent, the controller

sense of Article 4(1) GDPR. Moreover, OLG Celle also held that a singular access request can never be excessive for the purposes of Article 12(5) GDPR as the

crawlers to identify GDPR violations with the sole aim of claiming non-material damages rules out compensation under Article 82 GDPR. The controller embedded

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

France, it determined that the GDPR was not applicable. The controller did not have an establishment in the EU (Article 3(1) GDPR) and the controller did not

pursuant to Art. 26 (1) sentence 1 of the Brussels Ia Regulation 1215/2012 (cf. also BGH NJW 2018, 3178 marginal no. 16). The claim under No. 1, which is directed

in conjunction with Article 1 (1), 2 (1) of the Basic Law, Article 6 paragraph 1, 79 GDPR, §§ 3, 32, 91, 890, 935 et seq. ZPO, 53 (1) GKG in conjunction

for supervision and the possibility of relying on Article 9(2)(h) GDPR; violation of Article 13 GDPR (the obligation to inform data subjects): the HDPA

appearing both in paragraph 1 of Article 4 of Directive 95/46/EC and, henceforth, in paragraph 1 of article 3 of the GDPR and intended to define the scope

result of the violations of article 5.1 a), article 5.2, article 6.1, article 12.1, article 13.1 c) and d) and article 13.2 b) GDPR. 21. On 17 June 2020, the