Search results

an opinion on the certification requirements referred to in Article 43(8); (r) provide the Commission with an opinion on the icons referred to in Article

institution would also fall within the scope of Article 89 GDPR. Under Recital 160 “[w]here personal data are processed for historical research purposes, this Regulation

convictions under Article 10 GDPR. See, Albers, Veit, in BeckOK DatenschutzR, Article 9 GDPR, margin number 18 (C.H. Beck 2021, 38th Edition). The CJEU

Not to be offered to the Recipient Interim opening practicability H o w F o f b o a r d s Treatment round: 27/01/2021,(1 B ru ssel Section Market Court room

16Council of State no. 43.526, June 29, 1993, Arr. R.v.St. 1993, z.p.; BREED. 1993, z.p.; TBP 1994, 225. rPAGE 01-00003026497-0021-0025- □2- □1-� �Jl.� � L

first senate of 15. Dezember 1983 - 1 BvR 209/83, 1 BvR 269/83, 1 BvR 362/83, 1 BvR 420/83, 1 BvR 440/83, 1 BvR 484/83 (in DE) (Abstract in EN) - ECLI:

prosecution is undesirable (a so-called policy dismissal). T he M arket h o w a t w a ck both respect the orm e le and the material obligation to state reasons

§ 3 WG (cf. BGH, judgment of April 10, 2004 - IV ZR 75/03, r+s 2004, 404, 405; OLG Hamm, r+s 1992, 390 each on § 5 WG old version). However, the plaintiff

and Mr W have been involved in a dispute for some years. a dispute. The dispute concerns, inter alia, harassment and verbal aggression by Mr W and the

d violation of articles 11 of Legislative Decree no. 196 of 2003 and 5 of r R egolam ent (U E) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and o Council, because

own profile (applications r) - v)) and - "Group 4": improved means of contacting the defendant for paying doctors (applications w) - x)). With regard to the

article/and 5.1. c); 6.1.; 13.1. (c);13.1(e) and13.2(a)AVG: r PAGE 01-00001582885-0002-0033-01- □1-� r L _JCourt of Appeal Brussels - 2019/AR/1600- p. 3 - •

period of time has elapsed as a human rights concern (see ECHR, M. L. and W. W. v. Germany, judgment of 28 June 2018, nos. 60798/10 and 65599/10, § 100)

not outweigh the interests of the data subject (op. cit. marginal 101 f. m.w.r.). In this weighing up of interests, not only the type (criticality) and scope

203/22, r+s 2023, 265 Rn. 17; BGH ruling of April 22, 2022 – VI ZR 147/21, r+s 2022, 478 Rn. 6; BGH judgment of March 7, 2017 – VI ZR 125/16, r+s 2017,

data. This is in line with case-law by the Austrian Administrative Court (W 258 2217446-1 on the presumed "affinity for a political party"). the data subject

case of the plaintiff party C***** W*****, represented by T*****, against the defendant party Ö*****, represented by W*****, for EUR 2,500.00 s.A, on the

plaintiff, (Agent: mr. R.J.G. Ensink), and The college of mayor and aldermen of the municipality of Dongen (defendant) (Agents: mr. W.C.J.M. Dankers and [name

officio 4. 3R.v.St., June 29, 1993, e.g. Vedesca, no. 43,526. 4 MAREEN, D., The motives of the administrative legal act, TBP 2000, 20-38. See also: R.v.St.,

2018, against the N*** party E***stadt (respondent), represented by Erich R***, for violation of the right to secrecy as follows - The complaint is dismissed

GmbH). Company A used the services of company C (Amazon Web Services EMEA S.à r.l.) a subsidiary of company D (Amazon Web Services, Inc.) based in the United

reasons cited must suffice to Decision to wear. r PAGE 01-00001823325-0031-0040-02-01-� �!l�l!I L oo-w. _J, Court of Appeal Brussels -2020/AR/813- p. 32

AFFICHE_W in addition to verifying that they are not necessary cookies, are identified by the website itself as advertising, IDE and AFFICHE_W or, They

for example, KG Berlin, Order of 4 July 2017 - 1 W 153/16 - StAZ 2018, 183 and of 1 August 2013 - 1 W 413/12 - StAZ 2013, 348). 51 In administrative court

regard to bringing the processing into line with aforementioned provisions. r PAGE 01-00002223628-0002-0011-1-01-01-� L _JCourt of appeal Brussels-2021/AR/282-

confirms the contested decision. This decision was made by Mrs. A.R. Sturhoofd, J.H. Lieber and J.W. van Zaane and pronounced in public on June 1, 2021 by the

ECLI:NL:HR:2017:208, NJ 2017/134 m.nt. S.D. Lindenbergh and YES 2017/56 m.t. M.R. Hebly (Donata/New India), para. 3.3.3 (which statement is also cited in footnote

v. Commissioners of Customs & Excise (1973) 2 AllE.R 943 and Banker’s Trust v. Shabira (1980) 1 W.L.R 1274 are covered by this Law and, by extension, are

processing of data, determined in a G e . m P E P ro p o r ti o n d of f a l e r e c t a r e n t s o S R C T P AV deceived by interested parties. Since then

Federal Administrative Court Decision date 09.08.2021 Business number W211 2222613-2 Saying W211 2222613-2/12E DECISION The Federal Administrative Court decides

as: [defendant] , authorized representatives: mr. O.A. Sleeking and mr. A.W.D. lensink. 1. The process 1.1. The course of the procedure follows from the

principle of 3DPG refers to ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2021:1296,r.o.8. 3DPG refers to ECLI:NL:RVS:2020:2833,r.o.5.2. 3Research reportAP of September 29, 2021, appendix

appeal. Adopted by mr. J.A.W. Scholten-Hinloopen, chairman, and mr. J.J. van Eck and mr. B. Meijer, members, in the presence of mr. E.R. Fernandez, clerk. The

appellants, by ABN AMRO BANK N.V., established in Amsterdam, Intimate, Lawyer: Mr. R.L. Ubels in Amsterdam. 1Process 1.1 Appellants are hereinafter jointly referred

hedonists 11.54% The supplier of the above data is: W *** Direkt GmbH ***Street * 1 *** Vienna Email: office@w***.at Planned storage period: If data transfer

212-1, L.212-3, L.2141-1, L.211-1, L.232-1, R.631-3, L.621-1, L.621-2, L.621-7, L. 621-8, R.111-2, R.111-3, R.212-1, - Considering the law n ° 78-17 of January

the provisions on the protection of personal data by Ms. K.W. running a business under the name W. with its place of business in O. at ul. (…), President

and Food Safety Act (GESG), Federal Law Gazette I No. 63/2002 as amended. R E G R O U N D U N G A. Arguments of the parties and procedure Arguments of the

entity: H**** non-profit housing AG (FN 1*5*9* r) The accused legal entity, based in **** R***stadt, W***straße 1*-5* (hereinafter “H****”), is the responsible

was written on the patient A. W. But these are not the data of this patient. The data belongs to patient A. W. Patient A. W. does not exist with such data

Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court 15 May 2018, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:4396, JA 2018/99 m.nt. R.W.M. Giard, r. 4.5. 49Parliamentary Papers II 1989/90, 21561, no. 3 (explanatory memorandum)

Social Welfare Center in G., the Housing Cooperative in G. G., U. Sp. z o. o. w G .. The need to obtain the requested personal data was justified by the fear

reasons disapproved by the court (see W.-R. Schenke in: Kopp/Schenke, VwGO, 29th edition 2023, § 121 Rn. 9f. m.w.N. ). The legal issues that are the subject

defendant herself, but their data protection officer Ms. J. R., who is based at the parent company R. According to Art. 12 (1) GDPR, a person responsible only

submitting an application through a broker or R. SA, an agent cooperating with the broker or an employee of an outlet of R. SA is involved in the process of submitting

spelling, grammar and punctuation errors have been corrected.] NOTICE S P R U C H The DPA decides on Gustav A***'s privacy complaints (Appellant) of August

situation applicable at the time of the last oral hearing. 25 Cf. W.-R. Schenke / R.P. Schenke, in: Kopp / Schenke, VwGO, 27th edition 2021, § 113 Rn.

the AP, represented by W. van Steenbergen and J.M.A. Koster, have appeared. Connexxion, represented by mr. E.C. de Vries and mr. J.R. van Dorp, lawyers in

Chamber),composed of D. Spielmann, President, V. Valančius (Rapporteur) and R. Mastroianni, Judges,Registrar: V. Di Bucci,having regard to the written part

downloadable at the address: h t t p: / / a r e a d o c u m e n t a l. s e r v i z i r l. i t / a t t i / d o w n l o a d /AAAAYBnbrd+mLfAGu+72pN0QYxN3M4

mr. M.G.J.M. van Kempen, chairman, and mr. R. den Ouden and mr. V.F.R. Woeltjes, in the presence of mr. P.W.L. van den Bersselaar as clerk. The decision

appeal Brussels -2020/AR/582- p. 6 2. The written procedure (Article 755 Judg. W.). Partly in view of the health risks that the COVID-19 pandemic entails and

which is different or more advanced. This order was issued by R.R.M. de Moor, A.J. Henzen and M.W.M. Souren and publicly announced on 6 August 2020.

-BFH-, judgments of April 11, 2012, I R 63/11, Federal Tax Gazette -BStBl - II 2012, 539; of December 16, 1987 - I R 66/84 -, collection of officially unpublished

(LG Frankfurt a.M., decision of 10.09.2018 - 2-03 O 310/18, MMR 2018, 770 m.w.r.). According to these provisions, a ban can also be justified under Article

plaintiff is the wife of... G. The defendant is the editor of the magazine "W". In issue no. 40 of ... 2015, the defendant published an article entitled

constituency (BVerfG, decision of September 20, 2016 - 2 BvR 2453/15 -, juris para. 21 [m. w.n.]). The Office of the State Commissioner for Data Protection

right to request to be heard by the Disputes Chamber of the GBA. The petition w was notified to the GBA by court order dated 9 May 2019 with summons to appear

ambassador sent by the government of ****, who had been the project coordinator for W*** for the first respondent since May 1, 2022 for a period of 12 months. The

registered office in W. purchased a receivable from (...) Spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością S.K.A. with its registered office in W. A party to the loan

October 1966 - 2 BvR 506/63, NJW 1967, 195; judgment of 30 June 1976 - 2 BvR 435/76, NJW 1976, 1883; order of 14 July 1981 - 1 BvR 575/80). This therefore

Protocoleptor Bożena Kowalska on the action brought by Mr C. v. A. K. and W. G. with the participation of the Public Prosecutor and the Ombudsman to protect

Ms. S.P. gave the signature to the head nurse, K.R., and after that date the signature was with K.R. so that she could continue to update the vaccination

Borman, member of the single chamber, in the presence of Mr R. Grimbergen, Registrar. w.g. Borman w.g. Grimbergen member of the single chamber of the Registrar

Daalder, chairman, and mr. C.C.W. Lange and mr. W. den Ouden, members, in the presence of mr. B. Ley-Nell, registrar. w.g. descender chair The Registrar

Gundelach, members, in the presence of mr. A.M.E.A. Neuwahl, clerk. w.g. from Altena chair w.g. Neuwahl clerk Pronounced in public on July 20, 2022 280-973

that each party bears its own costs. This decision was made by Mrs. R.R.M. de Moor, J.W. van Rijkom and T. van der Valk and pronounced in public on 15 July

Vienna Higher Regional Court as the court of appeal of 9 December 2020, GZ 14 R 143/20g24, whereby the judgment of the Vienna Regional Court for Civil Matters

only provisionally (see BVerfG, Order of 19.10.2006 - 2 BvR 2023/06, juris, marginal no. 13, EuR 2006, 814).

ambassador sent by the government of ****, who had been the project coordinator for W*** for the first respondent since May 1, 2022 for a period of 12 months. The

referred to in Chapter IX, European Union law or theItpotr 0r,-0000r53sesê-00r,r,-00as-01,-0r-flL ffiJ Page 13 Brussels Court of Appeal - 20201 AR/II60 -

used A. S.à.r.l. as a subcontractor. The agreement between the third party and A. S.à.r.l. in implementation Article 28 GDPR allowed A. S.à.r.l. to disclose

for customer service, product development and BU performance testing) and R. S. (assistant to the branch manager in Austria and data protection officer)

gImkxOG4uaW1wb3J0Lm9yLnBhc3RlLmNvbnRlbnQiIDogIlR1byAvIExpaXTDpCBzaXPDpGx0w7YiLAogICJpMThuLmNob29zZS50ZXh0LmFsaWduIiA6ICJWYWxpdHNlIHRla3N0aW4gdGFzYXVzI

office in W. at Al. (…), President of the Personal Data Protection Office, finding a violation by H. Sp. z o. o. with its registered office in W. at Al.

administrative court dr S...the judge at the administrative court P...the judge R...and by honorary judge...honorary judge...on the basis of the hearing on November

Minister), consisting in the delivery to the addressee by the postal operator R. (...) of a damaged and incomplete correspondence containing personal data

authority data.nl Confidential/Registered UWV Board of Directors Attn. Mr.M.R.P.M.Camps PO Box58285 1040HG AMSTERDAM Date Unidentified May 31, 2021 [CONFIDENTIAL]

probability speaks in favour of success in the main proceedings as well (see only W.-R. Schenke, in: Kopp/Schenke, VwGO, 24th ed. 2018, para. 123 marginal no. 14

This statement was made by mr. G.H.W. Bodt, chairman, mr. S.A. van Hoof and mr. M. Ichoh, judges, in the presence of R. van Diest, registrar. The decision

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 4 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 2 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 5 3 2 2 2 6 2 6 1 - 1/8 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court has

place in disregard of the suspensive effect of an appeal, 29 cf. on this: W.-R. Schenke in: Kopp/Schenke, VwGO, 27th edition 2021, § 80 Rdn. 20. 30 This

rule, were only displayed in full to employees who worked with them (e.g. W, S, Receivables Management), while only the last four digits of the IBAN were

yet been conclusively clarified by case law (cf. Sesing MMR 2021, 544, 547 m.w.N. ). In the event of a dispute, the question of such a requirement of equivalence

[residence], APPLICANT for cassation, hereinafter: [person involved], lawyer: H.J.W. alto, against GOOGLE LLC, based in Mountain View, California, United States

in the case between [plaintiff] , in Amstelveen, plaintiff (Agents: mr. E.W.S. Peperkamp, mr. S.E.A. Vermeer-de Jongh and mr. G.N.N. camp house), and Dutch

April 15, 2021 at the litigation secretariat of the Council of State, Ms. W ... A ..., Mr. AA ... U ... and Mrs Y ... O ... ask the Council of State: 1

lawyer's salary. This decision was made by Mrs. H.J. van Kooten, R.S. van Coevorden and R.W. Polak, and was pronounced in open court on 14 December 2021 in

</script><script> (function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o)

as: [defendant] , authorized representatives: mr. O.A. Sleeking and mr. A.W.D. lensink. 1. The process 1.1. The course of the procedure follows from the

statement was made by mr. L.M. Reijnierse, judge, in the presence of mr. E.H.W. Schierbeek, clerk. The decision was pronounced on November 10, 2020 and will

November 26, 2020, GZ 3 R 128 / 20v-15 , with which the judgment of the Salzburg Regional Court of August 14, 2020, GZ 4 Cg 67 / 19w-9, was partially amended

refers to the judgment of the Federal Fiscal Court of October 28, 2009 (VIII R 78/05) and the ruling of the Bavarian State Office for Taxes of March 28, 2020

telephone (video) connection. The agents of defendants J. Stoffels (Roerdalen), R. Timmers (Valkenburg aan de Geul), M. Orasanin (Vaals) and Mr. A.A.C.M. Gidding-Baade

Bodewits), and the Dutch Data Protection Authority, defendant (attorneys: mr. W. van Steenbergen and mr. E Nijhof). Procedure By decision of 23 September 2019

operates in Belgium, and the complainant has been a senior executive of Company W for some time. years, i.e. a company that is closely related to Company Z.

business number W245 2252208-1/36E W245 2252221-1/30E Written copy of the verbal decision announced on March 31, 2023 I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K 

of 26 January 2006, p. 1). July 2017 - RiZ (R) 3/16 -, juris marginal no. 15 and of 16 March 2005 - RiZ (R) 2/04 -, juris marginal no. 20; VG Potsdam,

represented by his counsel Mr. Dr. Jan-Henning Strunz, Matray, Matray & Hallet, s.c.r.l, rue des Fories, 2, 4020 Liège, hereinafter “the plaintiff” The defendant:

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 9 . 0 4 . 2 0 2 2 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 5 8 2 2 4 7 0 2 8 - 1 / 1 1 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court