Search results

around the processing of personal data subject to Article 10 GDPR. Pursuant to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, the Privacy Appeals Board conducted a balancing test

violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 9 GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, and in accordance with Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the

in accordance with Article 21 paragraph 2, d) the personal data were processed unlawfully, [...]' . In paragraph 3 of the same article it is defined that

considered the controller as referred to in Article 2(d) of Directive 95/46 (Judgment of 10.7.2018, Jehovah's Order, C-25/17, EU: C: 2018: 551, para. 68). 69 In

with Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to bring its processing operations into compliance with the provisions of Article 9 GDPR. The

right to erasure (“right to be forgotten”) of Article 17 GDPR and Article 19 of Regulation 2018/1725. Under GDPR, such prolonged and unrestricted data retention

claimed party, for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notification of the Commencement Agreement

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

democratic legitimation necessary under Article 23(1) second sentence in conjunction with Article 20(1) and (2) and Article 79(3) of the Basic Law. Since data protection

erasure provided for in Article 17 GDPR? b)      that person is not entitled to a right of objection as referred to in Article 21 GDPR? 3.      If the answer

did not react either. GDPR applicable? (Article 3(2) GDPR) The DPA held that the GDPR was applicable pursuant of Article 3(2) GDPR. Because the controller

very serious in article 72.1. e) from the LOPDGDD, with 10,000 euros. -article 13 of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5 b) of the GDPR, and for the

change of SIM was the correct holder, Mr. D.D.D., not being able in any way notice that said person was not Mr. D.D.D., but a offender who was impersonating

accordance with article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 The GDPR defines

Company A 17/25 measures to the recipients to whom the personal data have been disclosed in accordance with Article 17, paragraph 2, and Article 19; h) withdraw

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

objected to its processing pursuant to Article 21(1) of the GDPR (Article 17(1)(a), (c)(1) and (d) of the GDPR). A request for erasure would therefore

that the controller had not violated Article 45 GDPR nor any of the subsequent Articles from Chapter V of the GDPR. The AEPD took into account that the

records a call to our telephone platform made on 13/04/18 by the user, Ms. D.D.D., requesting the Universal Supply Point Code, located in the ***DIRECTION

basis under Article 6(1) GDPR. In light of this, the DPA issued a fine of €70,000 to másLUZ Energía (SIE) by virtue of Article 83(5) GDPR for unlawful