Search results

regularly also covers pending proceedings from the time it comes into force. 39 See BVerwG, decision of December 6, 1982 - 9 B 3520/82 - juris Rn. 8. 40This distinguishes

2008/977/JHA (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89 -131, hereinafter: JI Directive) applicable (see letter a). The right to omission of data processing is not excluded by Art

in § 3 Para. 1 BDSG old version), i.e. not files or collections of files (see recital 15 to the GDPR). 90 (1.3) The term "personal data" is interpreted

damage, taking into account all the circumstances, based on free conviction, see BAG, judgment of May 5, 2022 - 2 AZR 363/21 -, juris para. 12 et seq.; Quaas

personal data if certain reasons are met. We have checked the reasons and see no basis for the deletion of the personal data stored by us. We keep a minimum

data, because the IP address enables the precise identification of users (see ECJ, judgment of 19.10.2016 - C-582/14; BGH, judgment of 16.5.2017 - VI ZR

para. 4 (s Art. 15 margin no. 49), Art. 20 para. 4 (see Art. 20 margin no. 28), Art. 21 para. 1 (see Art. 21 margin no. 42) and Art. 23 para. 1 lit i (s

dated May 31, 2019, the defendant informed the plaintiff that he did not see any violation of data protection law in the behavior complained about, so

DS-GVO. There would be a loss of discretion, since the defendant does not even see that the scope for discretion of Art. 58 DS-GVO is also open to the exercise

2021 (see point I.3), ./10 - Supplementary statement of the MB of August 22, 2021 (see point I.3), ./11 - Notice of the DA of 09/01/2021 (see point I

Letter c, GDPR is in any case an obligation based on objective law, see Frenzel in Paal /Pauly, General Data Protection Regulation Art. 6, paragraph 16), which

other (see Jahnel, Commentary on GDPR, Art. 5 Rz 9 and Art 13 Rz 40; Herbst in Kühling / Buchner (Hrsg), DSGVO² Art 5 Rz 11; Frenzel in Paal / Pauly, DS-GVO

24, 2020 (see point I.12), ./20 - Notification of the bB of December 21, 2020 (see point I.13 ), ./21 - Complaint by BF1 of 01/25/2021 (see point I.14)

court considered them as third parties. How control numbers are generated: See manual of cancer registration in German (Pages 96-98): https://www.basisdatensatz

least one of which was located in Austria (see point 1 of the findings). ), at least one of which is in Austria (see point 1 of the findings). According to

Celle substantially diverged from the prevailing German case law at the time (see OLG Köln - 20 U 295/21, OLG Dresden - 4 U 1905/21, LG Krefeld - 2 O 448/20)

case law report on labor law -NZA-RR- 2021, 410 para 45; Paal, in: Paal/Pauly, DS-GVO, 3rd edition 2021, Article 15, paragraph 33; Franck, in: Gola, General

by the standard of Union fundamental rights and the DS-GVO (for the whole see Gersdorf ZfWG 2021, special supplement 1/2021, 19 ( 20 et seq.); cf. BeckOK

the Basic Law. The provision was arbitrary, since it was not possible to see on what basis the concrete numerical determinations were based. In addition

in § 3 Para. 1 BDSG old version), i.e. not files or collections of files (see recital 15 to the GDPR). (1.3) The concept of "personal data" is interpreted