Search results

incorporated office), all formal powers and duties of the ICO rest with the Commissioner. However, the ICO has a Management Board, whose primary purpose is to

The UK's Data Protection Authority - the ICO - is also competent to enforce the PECR. The powers granted to the ICO to enforce the PECR include the provision

Example: Decision FS50819531 of the Information Commissioner's Office is called "ICO - FS50819531". The names of DPAs are mostly the abbreviation in the national

subject brought a claim for judicial review against the ICO at the High Court, on the basis that the ICO had failed to discharge a legal duty under Art 57(1)(f)

The Spanish DPA was not able to launch a sanction procedure because the ICO did not send any information following their cooperation request in the IMI

CRDNN came to the attention of the ICO when more than 3.000 complaints were made about the nuisance calls. The ICO found that there was no consent for

Commissioner’s Office (ICO). To report a concern to the ICO, visit ico.org.uk/concerns.   About the ICO/ News and events/ News and blogs/ ICO to audit data protection

ICO issued a decision regarding access to third party personal data. The complainant has requested a copy of an inspection report named kennels to the

for its direct marketing, the ICO's guidance explicitly states that it is insufficient for email marketing. Thus, the ICO fined the company approximately

reason, ICO issued a reprimand to Chief Constable West Midlands Police (WMP), for violating Articles 34(3), 38(1)(3), 40 and 57(1)(2) of UK GDPR. ICO also

for its direct marketing, the ICO's guidance explicitly states that it is insufficient for email marketing. Thus, the ICO fined the company approximately

the ICO letter 29 June 2018. 22 August 2018: Ticketmaster responded to the ICO letter 08 August 2018. 01 October 2018: Ticketmaster provided the ICO with

data subjects, contrary to ICO Guidance, and should have conducted a detailed assessment of vulnerabilities. In addition, the ICO noted that the DPA failed

UK DPA (ICO) in February 2019. This case is an appeal by Leave.EU and Eldon Insurance Services of 3 different fines imposed on them by the ICO in 2019

data breach to UK DPA - the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). On March 14, 2023, the ICO decided not to investigate the complaint further, due to lack

Office (ICO). His application to the Tribunal was prompted by the lack of action from the ICO in addressing his complaint. Subsequently, the ICO communicated

considered that the ICO was LSA, which the ICO accepted. 14. In support of the foregoing, the Litigation Chamber therefore seized the ICO of the complaint

out that, on December 4, 2018, the ICO ruled in a case materially identical to the present one. In that case, the ICO found no basis for criticizing the

August 24, 2019: the data protection control authority in the United Kingdom (ICO) they accept the case, making a provisional file. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd

Sweden Datainspektionen (Sweden) - DI-year-XXXX Switzerland United Kingdom ICO (UK) - name of the case/of the parties

adtech and real time bidding", 20 June 2019, p. 9 - https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2615156/adtech-real-time-bidding-report-201906-dl191220

connection with the virus. The Data protection authority (the ICO) issued guidelines here. The ICO mainly focused on the processing of personal data in the

called "DPC". The UK Information Commissioner's office is called "ICO". DPA_With_Country=ICO (United Kingdom) For certain links GDPRhub also needs the country

called "DPC". The UK Information Commissioner's office is called "ICO". DPA_With_Country=ICO (United Kingdom) For certain links GDPRhub also needs the country

Based on ICO, Guidance on the use of cookies and similar technologies, entitled "What are 'first party' and 'third party' cookies", https://ico.org.uk/

Commissioner’s Office (ICO). To report a concern to the ICO telephone our helpline 0303 123 1113 or go to ico.org.uk/concerns. About the ICO/ News and events/

affected by this error included the individual who had complained to the ICO. The ICO had to determine if the above-mentioned facts constitute a violation

England, and is not kept by the ICO. To report a concern to the ICO telephone our helpline 0303 123 1113 or go to ico.org.uk/concerns.

taken ICO issues its largest fine to tackle illegal pension cold calls About the ICO EnglishCymraegEnglishCymraeg https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news

nature were recorded by the ICO. Upon investigating further, the ICO identified LWL as the sender of these messages. The ICO notified LWL of the growing

On 6 February 2020, ICO adopted a decision, stating that the Northamptonshire Police acted lawfully by refusing to confirm or deny whether it held information

Office (ICO) fined British Airways €22 million for failing to protect the personal and financial details of more than 400,000 of its customers. An ICO investigation

The ICO issued a decision related to disclosure of information held by public authorities which was likely to include personal data. The complainant has

adaption law of the GDPR. URL: https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2019/2616245/fs50810710.pdf The ICO issued a decision related to disclosure

complaint against the DfE with the ICO about the way his request for information had been handled by the DfE. The ICO had to determine whether the DfE has

determine the applicability of Section 27(1)(b), the ICO based its legal reasoning in previous similar ICO decisions dated 2011 (FS50290504) and, specially

lawful. This decision reaffirms previous, similar, decisions; ICO - FS50819174 ICO - FS50849126 ICO - FS50668506 Share blogs or news articles here! to be completed

from. In the time frame assessed by the ICO, Parkin Beacher Ltd made 96,817 phone calls using this data. The ICO held that Parkin Beacher Ltd contravened

messages during the Covid-19 pandemic? The ICO found that DGE contravened Regulations 22 and 23 of PECR. The ICO finds that, between the 29 February 2020

unlawful, the ICO considered that she does not need to go on to separately consider whether disclosure would be fair or transparent. Finally, the ICO decided

principles. The ICO ruled that confirmation or denial whether it held any information, would reveal The Queen’s personal data. The ICO then has examined

The Information Commissioner’s Office of the UK (ICO) found that a full disclosure of information requested by data subject relating to data analysis reports

ICO holds that information relating to a grievance process must not be disclosed by the public authority under the UK Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)

cybersecurity firm, and they subsequently reported the incident to the ICO. The ICO found Cathay Pacific’s systems were entered via a server connected to

The UK DPA (ICO) fined an electric utilities company approximately €88,000 (£75,000) for making over 60,000 direct marketing calls to individuals who were

purposes. First, the ICO had to assess the approach adopted by the List Owners for the mentioned marketing activity. Second, the ICO needs to see if DTL

principles the ICO refers to Article 5 (1) (a). It then elaborates on the applicability of a legal basis according to Article 6 (1) (f). The ICO confirms a

Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issued a €50,000 fine against OSL Financial Consultancy Limited for illegally sending nuisance marketing texts

of Western forces, ICO emphasized that the personal data were highly sensitive and required careful handling. Accordingly, the ICO imposed the fine on

The ICO (International Commissioner's Officer) has fined the Valca Vehicle Ltd 80,000 GBP (€92,718) for sending more than 95,000 nuisance, marketing messages

The ICO issued a decisions regarding refusal to access to third party personal data. The complainant has requested information from University of Leicester

government schemes that did not exist and the ICO received a high number of complaints regarding them. As a result, the ICO issued a fine of €176,000 (£150,000)

pandemic. Members of the public have made to the ICO highest number of complaints to date, over 10000. ICO has also issued to Leads Works Ltd a 30 day enforcement

FOIA. The ICO had to determine whether the Council had correctly withheld information on the basis of section 40(2)of the FOIA. First, the ICO had to assess

FOIA. The ICO had to determine whether the Council had correctly withheld information on the basis of section 40(2)of the FOIA. First, the ICO had to assess

The ICO held that the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) was entitled to withhold disclosing one name on a document on the grounds that there

Further, ICO examined whether the conditions under section 55A Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) for the imposition of a monetary penalty are met. ICO confirmed

UK DPA (Information Commissioner’s Office - ICO) issues £130.000 fine for serious contravention to Privacy and E-Communications Regulations (EC Directive)

for making 1,718 unsolicited direct marketing calls. In August 2020, the ICO noticed a number of complaints made to the Telephone Preference Service ('TPS')

direct marketing purposes. The ICO found that LTH contravened Regulation 21 of PECR, and issued a £170,000 fine. The ICO stated that the conditions for

Subject] as required for the case." The data subject complained to the ICO. The ICO held that First Choices unlawfully failed to comply with the data subject's

to, not having registered with the ICO’s public data protection register) as well as a lack of cooperation with the ICO regarding the investigation. Share

The ICO issued a decision on the necessity of a disclosure of information hold by a public entity to satisfy the legitimate public interests of accountability

finding by the ICO that it had failed to comply with a large number of subject access requests without undue delay. Then, in January 2019 the ICO "was made

The UK DPA (ICO) served an Enforcement Notice against the credit reference agency Experian, after it found that Experian violated the transparency principle

The UK DPA (ICO) found that the Neath Port Talbot Council correctly withheld information about the name of a person submitting a complaint about another

On April 14, 2020, the ICO supported the decision of the Insolvency Service to withold the information it held about insolvent companies. Furthermore,

The ICO rules that there is sufficient legitimate interest in disclosure of the information relating to the job description of the CCG officers commissioning

available online at the following link: https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the- ico/policiesandprocedures/1890/ico enforcement communications policy.pdf Please

has adequate staff resources in place to process and respond to SARs. The ICO notes that the Council has taken steps to ensure it has adequate staffing

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) reprimanded Nottinghamshire County Council for infringing Article 32(1) (UK) GDPR. The failure to implement

company had not collected as scheduled. The ICO has issued a formal reprimand to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). The ICO investigation uncovered a lack of robust

While these are welcome remedial steps that have been taken by TVP, the ICO would expect more to be done in an incident such as this. For example, the

The ICO issued a penalty of £36,000 against Unite the Union for unsolicited direct marketing calls (in violation of Regulation 21 PECR) to 57,665 individuals

Commissioner's Office; ICO) received nearly 200 complaints over unsolicited electronic direct marketing text messages. The ICO started a preliminary investigation

original. Please refer to the English original for more details. https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/mpns/4021951/interserve-group-limited-monetary-penalty-notice

20 SARs which are up to one year old that have not been completed yet. The ICO considers that the council has failed to provide access to personal data and

Consequently, the ICO concluded that Energy Suite had been negligent and the "condition (b) from section 55A (1) DPA is met". The ICO considered the aggravating

Scotland cooperated with the ICO; and the fact that HIV Scotland reported the breach to the ICO within 2 hours of the incident. The ICO then went to impose a

officers. AMEX has been registered 5 • ICO. Information Commissioner's Office with the InformationCommissioner's Office ("ICO") since 19 June 2006 (registrationnumber

cooperation with the ICO’s investigation. 4. Continuation of unsolicited calls after launching of investigation by the ICO. Thus, the ICO issued a monetary

prior consent to BCS to receive such calls. The ICO issued a fine of £200,000 for this violation. The ICO considered that the conditions for the imposition

company. It first came to the attention of the ICO in connection with this matter on 10 August 2020. The ICO received a complaint (the “Complaint”) about

when it was appropriate to open emails which contained personal data. The ICO recommends that Parkside take further actions in respect of its technical

from individuals. The ICO therefore decided to imposed a fine of €11600 on Global One for breaching Articles 22 and 23 PECR. The ICO concluded that the contravention

that attracts interest. The ICO also considered that the address of high profile people was disclosed as a result. The ICO highlighted that the breach

______________________ https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1555/direc-marketing- guidance.pdf 8 • ICO. InformationCommissioner's ffice

unclear on their obligations, the ICO operates a telephone helpline. ICO communications about previous enforcement 17 • ICO. Information Commissioner's Office

old or under. Mermaids notified the ICO on the day it was told about this. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) considered that Mermaids processed

case organisations remain unclear on their obligations, the ICO operates a telephone helpline. ICO communications about previous enforcement action where businesses

EML was investigated by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). EML provided the ICO enforcement team with 7000 records of personal data (names, dates

subject of various complaints to the Information Commssioner's Office (ICO). The ICO therefore initiated an investigation into Papa John's direct marketing

Therefore, the ICO decided that the redacted information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 40(2) of FOIA. The test applied by the ICO under Article

calls resulted in a number of complaints to the ICO, which opened an investigation on 1 June 2020. The ICO found that ColourCoat contravened Regulations

had resulted in a personal data breach. It notified the same to the UK DPA (ICO) on the same day and stated, “attack had resulted in the encryption of civil

opt-out, which therefore lead the ICO to conclude that WBAC did not comply with the requirements of Regulation 22(3) PECR. The ICO also concluded that WBAC had

basis and provides a report to the ICO. In May 2020, upon analysing the monthly reports provided by Mobile UK, the ICO ascertained “that between 1 November

cited the challenges it faced to gather the information requested by the ICO. The ICO responded that some of the information, such as legal bases should be

the CPS has reported further incidents to the ICO involving the loss of portable storage devices. The ICO therefore consider there to be an on-going issue

2021.” The ICO opened an investigation and sought details about the volume of messages and an explanation of the routing error. Before the ICO, Royal Mail