Search results

in Kuner et al, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, p. 277 (Oxford University Press 2020). Tosoni, in Kuner et al, The EU General

Schiedermair in Simitis et al., Data Protection Law, Article 70 GDPR, margin numbers 6-8 (C.H. Beck 2019, 1st edition). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 68 GDPR, p. 1046 (Oxford University Press 2020). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU

related decisions in Category:Article 82 GDPR Zanfir-Fortuna, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 82 GDPR, p. 1162

November 2003, margin number 99. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1075. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023)

in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 86 GDPR, p. 1216 (Oxford University Press 2020). Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article

Article 84, margin number 1 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd edition). Lynskey in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 84 GDPR, p. 1198

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 68 GDPR, p. 1061 (Oxford University Press 2020). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU

find all related decisions in Category:Article 79 GDPR Kotschy, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 79 GDPR, p. 1135

GDPR, margin number 13 (C.H. Beck 2021, 3rd edition). Kotschy, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 83 GDPR, p. 1189

v Austria, paras 51–52. For more on this point, see, Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 75 GDPR, p. 1105

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020). Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU

related decisions in Category:Article 95 GDPR Costa de Oliveira in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 95 GDPR, p. 1296

related decisions in Category:Article 89 GDPR See, Wiese Svanberg, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 89 GDPR, p. 1242

finalizzate allo svolgimento dei compiti e all’esercizio dei poteri demandati al Garante per la protezione dei dati personali") regulates the procedure before

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 96 GDPR, p. 1305 (Oxford University Press 2020). Moore, in Kuner et al., The EU

conditions for such processing to take place. van Eecke, Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 87 GDPR, p. 1226

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 97 GDPR, p. 1310 (Oxford University Press 2020). Zerdick, in Kuner et al., The EU

7 GDPR, margin number 77 (C.H. Beck, 2nd Edition 2018). Kosta, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 7 GDPR, p. 350

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 74 GDPR, p. 1099 (Oxford University Press 2020). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU

Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 76 GDPR, p. 1111-1112 (Oxford University Press 2020). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The

same time, personal data as well (see Recital 163 GDPR). Tosoni in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 98 GDPR, p. 1315

International Company, Decision 01/2020 (available here). Hijmans, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 65 GDPR, p. 1021

GDPR, margin number 40 (Beck 2019) (accessed 3 September 2021). Hornung et al, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker gen. Döhmann, Datenschutzrecht, Article 1 GDPR

Facebook Ireland, margin number 59 (available here). Georgieva in Kuner et al, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, p. 1030 (Oxford

margin numbers 6-7 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd edition). Wiese Svanberg, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 90 GDPR, p. 1255

2020). Hijmans, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 56, p. 92 Hijmans, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection

find all related decisions in Category:Article 81 GDPR Kotschy, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 81 GDPR, p. 1154

management of an employee database)." Alvarez Rigaudias, Spinas, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 37 GDPR, p. 692

related decisions in Category:Article 63 GDPR Van Eecke, Simkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 63 GDPR, p. 998-999

find all related decisions in Category:Article 71 GDPR Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 71 GDPR, p. 1086

Article 31 GDPR, margin number 10 (Beck 2022, 3rd edition). Kotschy, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 31 GDPR, p. 628

DS-GVO/BDSG, Article 52 GDPR, margin number 6 (Nomos 2022). Zerdick, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 52 GDPR, p. 879

(available here and here). ECJ, Judgement of 4 July 2023, Meta Platforms Inc. et al. v. Bundeskartellamt, C‑252/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:537, paragraph 76 and the case

Regulation 2016/679, 8 October 2020 (available here). Tosoni, in Kuner et al, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, p. 969 (Oxford

GDPR, margin number 11 (C.H. Beck 2019). See for example Fuster in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 80 GDPR, p. 1148

on the Functioning of the European Union. Van Eecke and Šimkus, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 68 GDPR, p. 1234

Regulation 2016/679’, 25 May 2018, pp. 15-16 (available here). Kuner, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 49 GDPR, p. 854

Regulation (GDPR): A Practical Guide, p. 157 (Springer 2017), citing Laue et al., Datenschutzrecht, Rechte der betroffenen Person (2016), margin number 41

authority has adopted under Article 28(8)". See, Millard, Kamarinou, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 28 GDPR, p. 606

DSGVO BDSG, Article 6 DSGVO, margin number 3, (Otto Schmidt 2018). Roßnagel et al., in Zeitschrift für Datenschutz (2015) pp. 455-456. Lex posterior derogat

the right of erasure and/or the right to object, in relation to the “derecho al olvido” (the “right to be forgotten”), the following question is asked: must

On 29 November 2018, the Garante adopted the Regole deontologiche relative al trattamento di dati personali nell’esercizio dell’attività giornalistica.

should be named; with three or more only the first author's name plus "et al." need be given. Do not use footnotes in your word draft. It will be easier

[applicants] et al; - the official report of the oral hearing of November 18, 2020. 2.2 The court has set a date for the decision. 2.3 [Applicants] et al. request

The French Council of State (Conseil d' Etat) issued 13 decisions on the right to be forgotten, in the light of the CJEU's judgment in C-136/17 CNIL against

complaints that CSR et al. cannot be received in their claim. CSR et al.'s appeal will first be discussed. This appeal by CSR et al. fails on the basis of

ambos, de acceso al centro comercial MERCADONA sito en la calle Frederic Mompou s/n de San Boi de Llobregat por tiempo de dos años, así como al abono de la

la oposición al mismo de 3 JURISPRUDENCIA entenderse que sus conclusiones (salvo las referidas a la sanción de la infracción imputada al demandado) estánamparadas

court received a petition on behalf of [petitioner sub 1] et al. In it, [applicant sub 1] et al. Requests - in short - that Google be ordered by decision

Articles 5, paragraph 1 to 1. c) and article 5, paragraph 1 al. f) with article83, paragraph 5, al. a), the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation679/2016

Ziggo et al. pointed out that the damage that DFW suffers as a result of the individual downloader is very small, since according to Ziggo et al. the Film

uitmaakt van de litigieuze klacht. Het betreft hier o.a. de vraag naar het al dan niet van toepassing zijn van de voornoemde aanbeveling. 4. De verweerder

version of the Privacy Ordinance, legal commentary», December 2019, Skullerud et al. Objective personal information is, for example, the data subject's age, address

Anwara Sp. z o.o., with its registered office in Warsaw at Al. Jerozolimskie 81 (formerly: Al. Solidarności 117/207), hereinafter referred to as the "Company"

necessary to achieve these goals (2019. judgment of 24 September GC et al. GC et al. [Delete links to special data], C‑136/17, EU:C:2019:773, paragraph 74)

inadmissible his claim against Arrow and dismissed the claims against ING et al., ordering [the appellant] to pay the costs of the proceedings and the follow-up

Personal Data Act and the Privacy Ordinance - Commentary edition», Skullerud et al. (2019). Article 29 Working Party Opinion 06/2014 on the concept of legitimate

Seitlinger et al, C-293/12 and C-594/12, EU:C:2014:238, nos. 35, 47 and 54 et seq.; Constitutional Court of Austria, decision of 27 June 2014, G 47/12 et al, AT:VFGH:2014:G47

ricezione dello stesso, a comunicare quali iniziative siano state intraprese al fine di dare attuazione a quanto prescritto e di fornire ogni elemento ritenuto

condotta per i sistemi informativi gestiti da soggetti privati in tema di crediti al consumo, affidabilità e puntualità nei pagamenti” – was not expired yet, the

DatenschutzR/Stender-Vorwachs, Ed. 28, Article 85 marginal no. 20; Frey, in: Schwartmann et al, DSGVO/BDSG, 2018, Art. 85 para. 25; further probably Schiedermair, in: Ehmann/Selmayr

C-136/17, GC et al. (31) The judgment of the European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) on 24 September 2019 in case C136/17, GC et al. is a continuation

DatenschutzR/Stender-Vorwachs, Ed. 28, Article 85 marginal no. 20; Frey, in: Schwartmann et al, DSGVO/BDSG, 2018, Art. 85 para. 25; further probably Schiedermair, in: Ehmann/Selmayr

decline of regulatory offences in particular and video surveillance (Gill et al., Assessing the impact of CCTV, the South City Case Study, Home Office Online

37/2020. In their short commentary on the decision, linked below, Craddock et al. also highlight the fact that part of the infringement, as well as at least

question now with due consideration ( of the evidence provided by Proximus al-dan-not in support of the need for the requested suspension, { of the balancing

websites is usually covered by the journalist exemption, see Wille Johansen et al., Personal Data Act commentary edition, Universitetsforlaget 2001, page 92

cases of Vnukovo Airlines (V.A.) and Others v. v. Vnukovo Airlines (V.A.) et al. Attorney General (2001) A.A.D. 969 and Kyriakides v. Republic (2013) 3 A

obligations under Article 6, §2, al. 5 and Article 9 of the Camera Act 1 2. there is a serious indication that article 6, § 2, al. 4 of the aforementioned law

et al. - the statement of defense of [defendant 1] et al. - the oral hearing held on September 23, 2020 - the pleading note of [plaintiff 1] et al. - the

interest owed by [applicants] et al. 2.8. On 1 October 2020, [applicants] et al. paid off the revolving credit. [applicants] et al. paid a total of €40,667.67

processing for [appellant sub 1] et al, e) to [appellant sub 1] et al in any other personal data relating to [appellant sub 1] et al that it processes. II. Order

of 3 November 1994 - 3 C 17.92 - BVerwGE 97, 79; Stuhlfauth, in: Bader et al., VwGO, 7th ed., § 113 marginal no. 34). If the plaintiff asserts - as here

contribute to increased compliance with the regulations. 5 By Skullerud et al. (2019), page 347, it appears: Contraceptive considerations dictate that the

order, as it does not specify the legal grounds that justify the decision (al. B) of paragraph 1 of article 615 of the CPC), has been overcome. In any event

the name of [applicant] et al. Course of the proceedings on appeal 1.1 By notice of appeal dated 12 March 2021, [applicant] et al. appealed against a decision

the statements made by [defendants et al.] are unlawful and therefore agrees with the Public Prosecution Service et al. The reasons for this are explained

Law: Article 4(1) GDPR Ley 16/2011, de 24 de junio, de contratos de crédito al consumo (law on consumer credit contracts) Type: Complaint Outcome: Upheld

riportato la notizia dell’avvenuto utilizzo dell’App Mitiga Italia al fine di consentire l’accesso al Mapei Stadium di Reggio Emilia per assistere all’evento calcistico

Article 38.4 g), of the aforementioned Law, which considers as such: “Use al- data storage and recovery when the information has not been provided or obtained

demands are made for guilt. In legal literature, for example in Skullerud et al., Personal Protection Ordinance, Lovkommentar, (per 1 May 2022, juridika.no)

general, establece el sometimiento de tales sistemas al marco legal y con los límites inherentes al mismo, ya señalados anteriormente. Ello implica que

defendants - insofar as summoned by each of them - and that TikTok et al. only meant TikTok et al. 1 The procedure 1.1. The course of the procedure is apparent

contribute to increased compliance with the regulations.8 By Skullerud et al. (2019), page 347, it appears: Contraceptive considerations dictate that the

Article 38.4 g), of the aforementioned Law, which considers as such: “Use al- data storage and recovery when the information has not been provided or obtained

organization or person and aimed at the promotion or sale of services, products (al without payment), as well as brands or ideas, addressed by an organization

contribute to increased compliance with the regulations.6 By Skullerud et al. (2019), page 347, it appears: Contraceptive considerations dictate that the

contribute to increased compliance with the regulations. 7 By Bergseng Skullerud et al., 2019, commentary on the Privacy Ordinance, page 347 it appears: Contraceptive

until 2019. On this date, Mr. X sold all of his shares to the S.A de droit al/emand Z and has ceased his functions as a director. Z then surrendered all

known, in particular in the Google Spain6 judgments, Google/CNIL7 and GC et al./CNIL8. The Belgian Court of Cassation also ruled on the dereferencing and

et al., "Art. 8 ECHR', in J.H. Gerards et al. (eds.), Sdu Commentaar ECHR. Part I, The Hague: Sdu 2020, p. 868-894 (No. C.5). 132 C.J. Forder et al., "Art

ECHR in some respects. 6.38. NJCM et al. focus on the alleged violation of Article 8 ECHR, as confirmed by NJCM et al. at the hearing and understood by the

Facebook et al. is that only Facebook Ireland is responsible for the actions at issue in these proceedings. In that light, Facebook et al. do indeed refer

(…)” 2.13. On 24 October 2018, [plaintiff's] lawyer informed [defendants et al.] by registered letter of [plaintiff's] position that the use of [plaintiff's]

verwijderen, kan door de Geschillenkamer niet worden vastgesteld of deze weigering al dan niet terecht was om vervolgens te beoordelen of er sprake was van een

a hit list ubiquitous (see,in this sense, the judgment eDate Advertisin et al., C-509/09 and C-161/10,EU: C2011: 685, paragraph 45).(…) To respect the rights

notes that the Disputes Chamber infringed Article 5(1)(c) AVG derived, not al/one from the use of the national register number, but oak from the save the

finalizzate allo svolgimento dei compiti e all'esercizio dei poteri demandati al Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, nonche' all'adozione dei provvedimenti

rejected the request of [appellant sub 1] et al. concerning: a) the initial request of [appellant sub 1] et al. based on Article 15(1) GDPR for access to