Search results

this case - no more than a simple subsidiaryor an establishment of GOOGLE LLC.An administrative fine, an injunction and publicity are coercive measures

administration but if I had not gone to court, this matter would be involved in an unresolved drawer, and my personal and professional dignity questioned in

personal data are all data relating to an identified or identifiable individual, and an identifiable individual is an identifiable person. directly or indirectly

not take into account the context in which persons were at the time an exposure to an infected person was recorded. For example, a health professional or

indirectly, in particular by means of an identifier, such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or one or more elements

Bundesgerichtshof asks for an answer to the question whether, in the case of a request for a listing against the person responsible for an internet search service

their DPO who independently monitored decisions made in their capacity as an executive of the company. The Data Protection Officer (“DPO”) of a Berlin

kind of information regarding the data that they process. After launching an investigation, the AEPD found that the one of the websites did have a privacy

with an access request. This request did not receive any reply. After examining the defense notes provided by the company, the Italian DPA opened an administrative

complaint before the Spanish DPA, which started an investigation and notified the controller about an alleged violation of Articles 6(1) and 15 in connection

infringement is punishable by a fine of up to €20,000,000 or, in the case of an undertaking, an amount equivalent to a maximum of 4 % of the total annual aggregate

689/1981; this is because "the security incident [...] caused, in an accidental manner, an unauthorized disclosure of the data entered by the participants

of the Austrian Armed Forces in order to asses the member in the context of an "extended reliability check" which is foreseen in national law. The Respondent

Articles 112 and 123 of the LPACAP, the interested parties may, on an optional basis, lodge an appeal for reconsideration with the Director of the Spanish Agency

the person responsible for thesystem, an aspect verified by the acting force displaced to the scene.Third. It is an established fact that there is no information

although they complied with an erasure request, they did not subsequently notify the data subject. A data subject made an erasure request at MAG Interactive

had an impact on the privacy consents reported in the customer data sheets. In this regard, during the inspections, it was found that there was an inconsistency

Every EU jurisdiction has different legal writing styles. We have tried to develop a common ground in our GDPRhub style guide. → Please consult the GDPRhub

Authority in password-protected ZIP format with an online download option via a channel protected by an https SSL 3.1 certificate. 3. During the analysis

The Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) conducted an investigation into ING Bank N.V. Amsterdam – Bucharest Branch, following a personal data breach notification, and