Search results

Senate jurisdiction for legal protection reasons in accordance with Section 27 DSG. This is particularly because the question of the qualification of the data

federal or Land laws provide for a decision by senates. Pursuant to Section 27 (1) DSG, the Federal Administrative Court decides through the Senate on appeals

details. decision date 02/27/2023 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §18 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 5 DSG §24 paragraph 8 GDPR Art51

the German original for more details. decision date 02/27/2023 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §1 DSG §24 GDPR Art17 GDPR Art5 DSGVO Art6 Abs1 litf GDPR Art9

44 GDPR. This matter is covered by Senate decisions in accordance with § 27 DSG. The procedure of the administrative courts with the exception of the Federal

in accordance with § 44 DSG." Although § 44 DSG does grant data subjects a right to access, according to its chapter in the DSG, it only applies to the

representative power of attorney to exercise their rights under Sections 24 to 27 DSG before the data protection authority and the BVwG. The 1st MB is a company

For example, § 62 of the Austrian Data Protection Act (Datenschutzgesetz - DSG) sets a penalty of €50,000 for, inter alia, (1) intentionally obtaining illegal

17 GDPR. This matter is covered by Senate decisions in accordance with § 27 DSG. The procedure of the administrative courts, with the exception of the Federal

more details. decision date 07/28/2022 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §24 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 5 GDPR Art12 GDPR Art15 GDPR Art4 VwGVG §28 paragraph

laws provide for the decision to be made by senates. Pursuant to Section 27 (1) DSG, the Federal Administrative Court decides through the Senate on complaints

details. decision date 01/20/2022 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §1 DSG §24 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 5 GDPR Art17 GDPR Art4 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art58 GDPR

decision date 01/16/2023 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §1 DSG §24 DSG §24 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 5 DSG §7 GDPR Art4 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art6 VwGVG §28 paragraph

01/03/1930 to 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

the German original for more details. decision date 04/27/2022 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §4 GDPR Art15 saying W176 2244407-1/18E In the name of the

para. 2, item 7 DSG 2000 in conjunction with Art. 69, para. 5 DSG Ad 2b): Art. 62, para. 1, item 4 DSG Ad 3a): Art. 52, para. 2, item 4 DSG 2000 in conjunction

intelligibility of the content of the decision. The right of confidentiality (§ 1 DSG) and confidentiality interests of the respondent, a legal person whose lawful

more details. decision date 05/17/2022 standard AVG §38 B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §24 GDPR Art12 GDPR Art15 DSGVO Art15 Abs1 litc GDPR Art77 VwGVG §17 saying

judgment of 25.02.2020, 5 Sa 108/19 § 18aF DSG MV, § 19aF DSG MV, § 20aF DSG MV, § 21aF DSG MV, § 22aF DSG MV, § 6 Abs 4 BDSG, § 37 EUV 2016/679, § 39

Article 27 GDPR and sent a reply to the data subject's complaint stating that any violation of Article 13 GDPR has been rectified under § 24(6) DSG by the

1934 DSG Art. 2 § 24 today DSG Art. 2 § 24 valid from May 25th, 2018 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 120/2017 DSG Art No. 133/2009 DSG Art. 2

Section 1 DSG goes beyond that of Art. 8 EU-GRC, so that Section 1 (1) DSG does not apply at all. But even if one were to see an application of § 1 DSG, the

the Austrian Data Protection Act (Datenschutzgesetz - DSG). Due to the derogations in § 9(1) DSG, the DSB would hence not be competent to handle the complaint

to Section 1 (1) DSG must be checked and restrictions on this right may result from Section 1 (2) DSG. 14. According to Section 1 (2) DSG, restrictions on

act, with a written statement dated October 16, 2020, received on October 27, 2020, and applied for the complaint to be dismissed with reference to the

proceedings. Pursuant to Article 69 (4) of the DSG, proceedings pending before the ordinary courts under the DSG 2000 at the time of entry into force of this

the StVO. 2 DSG and Art. 8 para. 2 ECHR and justify such an intervention.§ 98a para. 2 first sentence StVO 1960 therefore violates § 1 DSG and Art. 8 ECHR

2009, p. 1. No. L 119 of 4.5.2016, p. 1; section 29 Data Protection Act - DSG, Federal Law Gazette I No. 165/1999 as amended; section 17 General Administrative

with the documents submitted in them (ruling of the Regional Court of Wels of 27.12.2019; ruling of the Regional Court of Karlsruhe of 2.8.2019; decision of

application of Section 1 (1) DSG requires, among other things, that the data is personal. According to Section 1 (2) DSG, restrictions on the right to

held that the disclosure of data under § 1 Austrian Data Protection Act (DSG) was lawful. In particular, Austrian law allowed for parties to be represented

Council of 27 June 2016/679 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the competent authorities of 27 April 2016

an entry according to § 24 DSG and is therefore not covered by the fee and tax exemption clause of § 69 Paragraph 6 DSG. 27. This sum is to be paid into

2016; §§ 4 Paragraph 6, 24 Paragraph 1 and 5 of the Data Protection Act - DSG, Federal Law Gazette I No. 165/1999 as amended; Sections 2, 3, 80 of the Federal

apply § 12 and § 13 of the Austrian Data Protection Act (Datenschutzgesetz - DSG) that specifically deal with the processing of pictures (including videos)

represented by Dr. Josef B***, lawyer in ****, of 22 October 2020 (ha. received on 27 October 2020) against N*** Ärztezentrum - Dr. U*** & Co GmbH (respondent)

providers could not be derived from § 4 DSG 2000. The clause therefore complied with the provisions of the DSG and was not intransparent. The court of

eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32002L0058 National_Law_Name_1=§ 29 DSG National_Law_Link_1=https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/1999/165/A2P29/NOR40195925

eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32002L0058 National_Law_Name_1=§ 29 DSG National_Law_Link_1=https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/1999/165/A2P29/NOR40195925

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing

paragraph 34, paragraph one, DSG 2000 as well as Bresich, Dopplinger, Dörnhöfer, Kunnert, Riedl, DSG, p. 190 to § 24 DSG), which must be taken into account

1934 DSG Art. 2 § 24 today DSG Art. 2 § 24 valid from May 25th, 2018 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 120/2017 DSG Art No. 133/2009 DSG Art. 2

paragraph 2, item 6, DSG 2000 in conjunction with Article 69, paragraph 5, DSG and Article 62, paragraph 1, item 4, DSG. 2 item 4 DSG 2000 in conjunction

to data protection of § 1 DSG in the scope of § 9 para. 1 DSG is effectively undermined, since due to the in § 9 para. 1 DSG standardized exclusion of

1934 DSG Art. 2 § 24 today DSG Art. 2 § 24 valid from May 25th, 2018 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 120/2017 DSG Art No. 133/2009 DSG Art. 2

DSGVO or DSG. In the attachment, the BF sent the application dated to the MB (by e-mail). 01/31/2020: "Re: Data information according to DSG/DSGVO about

transitional provision of Section 69 (4) DSG - with reference to the transitional provision of Section 69, Section 4, DSG - first stated that in the present

§ 24 Paragraph 1 DSG, which according to § 34 Paragraph 5 DSG is to be applied accordingly in the scope of the 3rd main part of the DSG, every person concerned

the Data Protection Act (DSG), § 22 DSG, paragraph 8)., Practical commentary on the Data Protection Act (DSG), paragraph 22, DSG, paragraph 8 ). Since the

Section 1 Paragraph 2 DSG, the complaint turned out to be unfounded, which is why it was filed in accordance with Section 24 Paragraph. 5 DSG Since the respondent

accordance with § 62 DSG. If profit or damage intent In addition, a violation of § 1 DSG is even threatened with criminal penalties (§ 63 DSG). Ultimately, the

consideration was given to Sullivan v Bristol Film Studios Limited [2012] EMLR 27 and whether “there is a means by which the claim can be adjudicated without

DSGParagraph 22, paragraph 5, DSG, the responsibility for imposing fines on natural and legal persons for violations of the DSG and the DSGVO lies with the

protection of § 1 DSG goes beyond that of Art 8 EU-GRC, so that § 1 DSG does not apply at all. Even if one were to see an area of application of § 1 DSG, the complaint

procedurally according to the new legal situation (DSG idF BGBl. I No. 24/2018) according to § 24 Para. 5 DSG. Substantive law is the However, the case after

protection of § 1 DSG goes beyond that of Art. 8 EU-GRC, so that § 1 DSG does not apply at all. But even if one were to see an application of § 1 DSG, the complaint

Paragraph 6, DSG.The bP requests that it be determined in accordance with Paragraph 24, Paragraph 2, Item 5, DSG in conjunction with Paragraph 1, DSG that the

paragraph 2 GDPR. 27 In its response to the appeal, the DSB refers to the provisions of Section 24 paragraph 2 no. 5 and paragraph 5 DSG, from which it follows

rights under Article 1 GDPR or § 1 DSG, Art. 5 DSGVO or § 37 DSG, Art. 12, 22 and 41 DSGVO and Art. 34 DSGVO or § 56 DSG has been violated. The complainant

work (VGÜ) Federal Law Gazette II No. 27/1997; Health monitoring at work (VGÜ) Federal Law Gazette Roman II No. 27/1997; Federal law on the protection of

(paragraph one, DSG) and interest in secrecy of the first respondent, a legal entity, is offset by the legal mandate under paragraph 23, paragraph 2, DSG, whereby

has not been changed. § 33 DSG 2000 contained a clear reversal of the burden of proof (only) for fault. § Article 33.3 of the DSG 2000 read "(3) The client

(paragraph one, DSG) and interest in secrecy of the first respondent, a legal entity, is offset by the legal mandate under paragraph 23, paragraph 2, DSG, whereby

more details. decision date 01.12.2021 standard B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §1 DSG §24 DSG §9 GDPR Art4 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art57 GDPR Art6 GDPR Art77 GDPR Art85

lift systems in the period from 27. to December 29, 2019 violated his basic right to secrecy according to § 1 paragraph 1 DSG Has. C. Findings of Facts 1.

meaning of § 4(6) Austrian Data Protection Act (Datenschutzgesetz - DSG). (Note: §4(6) DSG is considered as national law adopted under Article 23(1)(i) GDPR

Section 9 DSG is linked to Article 85 GDPR, a fundamental provision including an opening clause (cf. The national regulation in Paragraph 9, DSG is linked

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing

Protection Act (DSG), Federal Law Gazette I No. 165/1999 as amended; §§ 2 Z 14, 17 Para. 1 and Para. 2, 24c Para. 1, 24e Para. 1 Z 1 and 27 Para. 17 of the

over it. Furthermore, § 35 Austrian Data Protection Act (Datenschutzgesetz - DSG) only allows for the DSB to exert its investigative and corrective powers

DSGParagraph 22, paragraph 5, DSG, the responsibility for imposing fines on natural and legal persons for violations of the DSG and the DSGVO lies with the

of the amounts is higher. According to Section 22 Para. 5 DSG Paragraph 22, Paragraph 5, DSG, the responsibility for imposing fines on natural and legal

the VwGH on the right to information issued in connection with the DSG 2000: VwGH 27.9.2007, 2006/06/0330 with reference to VwGH 28.3.2006, 2004/06/0125

of the amounts is higher. According to Section 22 Para. 5 DSG Paragraph 22, Paragraph 5, DSG, the responsibility for imposing fines on natural and legal

(Data Protection Act - DSG), Federal Law Gazette I No. 165/1999 as amended by Federal Law Gazette I No. 51 /2012, excerpt reads: DSG), Federal Law Gazette

valid from 01/01/2014 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

to June 30, 1934 DSG Art. 1 § 1 today DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid from January 1st, 2014 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 51/2012 DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid

information in accordance with Art. 13 ff. DSG VO and the right to information in accordance with Art. 15 DSG VO. By withholding the available and relevant

be made by senates. According to § 27 Data Protection Act (DSG) as amended (which essentially corresponds to § 39 DSG 2000, which was in force until 24

details. decision date 09.12.2021 standard AVG §74 B-VG Art133 Para.4 DSG §1 DSG §24 GDPR Art12 GDPR Art14 GDPR Art32 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art57 GDPR Art58 GDPR

of 53 ErlRV on the StF of § 1 DSG 2000, 1613 BlgNR 20. GP 34 f; Eberhard in Korinek/Holoubek, B-VG, 12th Lfg [2016], § 1 DSG, Rn. 58, mwN). 36 5.2.3. Sovereign

be made by senates. According to § 27 Data Protection Act (DSG) as amended (which essentially corresponds to § 39 DSG 2000, which was in force until May

Section 1 (1) and (2) and Section 24 (1) and (5) of the Data Protection Act (DSG), Federal Law Gazette I No. 165/1999 as amended: Article 51, paragraph one

complaints (Appellant) of August 3, 2018 and June 25, 2019 (ha. received on June 27 2019) against N*** AG (respondent) for alleged infringement of the law secrecy

the first and second complainants' right to confidentiality (under §1(1) DSG) by obtaining their "most personal" data - which the Austrian DPA understood

on the provision of § 34 para. 1 DSG 2000 - E OGH 25.09.2017, 6 Ob 217/16d as well as the materials on § 34 para. 1 DSG 2000 [BGBI I 1999/165; ErlautRV

with Section 24 DSG is that the data subject receives the information to which he is entitled. This already results from § 24 paragraph 5 DSG according to

senates. According to paragraph 27, Data Protection Act (DSG) as amended (which essentially corresponds to paragraph 39, DSG 2000, which was in force until

8 sentence 1 DSG NRW. According to this, the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation and the provisions of Part 2 of the DSG NRW should be

will expire on May 25, 2018 according to § 72 DSG NRW stepped. Apart from the fact that, according to the DSG NRW old version, the person concerned had no

is not given. It does not follow from § 5.8 sentence 1 DSG NRW in conjunction with Article 15.1 DSG NRW. In conjunction with Article 15(3), first sentence

of the defendant against the judgment of the Regional Court of Wels of July 27, 2021, 2 Cg 28 / 21a-9, rightly recognized in a closed session: Saying The

01/03/1930 to 06/30/1934 DSG Art. 2 § 24 today DSG Art. 2 § 24 valid from May 25th, 2018 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 120/2017 DSG Art. 2 § 24 valid

01/03/1930 to 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

to June 30, 1934 DSG Art. 1 § 1 today DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid from January 1st, 2014 last changed by Federal Law Gazette I No. 51/2012 DSG Art. 1 § 1 valid

01/03/1930 to 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

form does not change the preclusion period of § 24 (4) Data Protection Act (DSG) as long as the "knowledge of the event giving rise to the complaint" is not

by which the judgment of the Landesgericht Wels (Regional Court of Wels) of 27 December 2019, GZ 2 Cg 72/19v-15, was amended in part, in a closed session:

senates. Pursuant to section 27 of the Data Protection Act (DSG) as amended (which essentially corresponds to section 39 DSG 2000, which was in force until

rnhofer/Kunnert/Riedl, DSG (2018), page 145). The deviating provision in § 12.4 no. 1 of the DPA on the previous search termDSG of the next search term