Search results

progress. Fill in the name used for the recital if you use it so we can ensure a somewhat streamlined practice. Recital 1: The protection of natural persons

per Article 45(3) GDPR, and subject to regular reporting, which Article 97(2) GDPR provides for. The third paragraph of Article 97 GDPR, obliges the Commission

enforcement of the GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 59 GDPR Selmayr, in Ehmann, Selmayr, DS-GVO Kommentar, Article 59 GDPR, margin number

undefined in the GDPR. “Expertise” is only referred to again under Article 41(2)(a) GDPR, although briefly. Additionally, Article 41(1) GDPR specifies that

to in the first sentence of recital 63 GDPR. Neither the wording of Article 12(5) GDPR nor that of Article 15(1) and (3) GDPR condition the provision (to

data under Article 4(1) GDPR, especially because they allow to single out a data subject within the meaning of recital 26 of the GDPR. It is sufficient that

of articles 38.1, 38.3, 39.1 a) and 39.1 b) of the GDPR; - to issue an injunction against Company A to comply with Article 38.1 of the GDPR, within four

understood as made to the GDPR, in accordance with article 94 of the last. Likewise, it is apparent from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

to access under Article 15 GDPR because the controller was entitled to reject the request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The court reasoned that this

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

personal data, which resulted in a conflict of interest in breach of Article 38(6) GDPR. The data subject filed complaint regarding a violation to their right

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 W214 2233132-1/13E

DSGVO and Art. 38 BayDSG, Recital 153 of the DSGVO continues to refer to this requirement, so that - when interpreting the law, the recitals do not have an

an access request under Article 15(1) GDPR. According to Recital 63 GDPR, the right of access under Article 15 GDPR serves data subjects to be informed about

accordance with Article 38.3 of the AVG Findings of the Inspectorate 316. The Inspection Service finds that BSCA nv, contrary to what Article 38.3 of the AVG prescribes

37.7 GDPR in connection with the designation of the data protection officer. 4) Breach of Articles 38.2 and 38.3 GDPR and no breach of Article 38.6 GDPR:

meaning of the GDPR, and such processing of personal data did not fall within the scope of the "household exemption". Therefore, the GDPR applied in full

Article 32 GDPR. Retaining personal data of an applicant for a lease after another applicant has been selected also violates Article 5(1)(e) GDPR. The customer

norm addressee of Chapter V GDPR. The bB be directly responsible for BF2, which violated Art. 44 ff GDPR. Regarding The GDPR is applicable to the processing

DSGVO and Art. 38 BayDSG, Recital 153 of the DSGVO continues to refer to this requirement, so that - when interpreting the law, the recitals do not have an

institutions, the child's best interests must be a primary consideration'; - recital 38 of the Regulation, according to which children deserve specific protection

right to information according to Art 15 GDPR, especially since it can be derived from recitals 9 and 10 of the GDPR that the European legislator is reducing

of articles 37.7, 38.1, 38.3 and 39.1.b) of the GDPR; - to issue an injunction against Company A to comply with Article 38.3 of the GDPR within four months

6.1.f) GDPR) and in this balancing the considerations of the GDPR related to Art. 6.1.f) GDPR eligible [...] be taken, in particular Recital 47. Thus

to Article 83 GDPR in conjunction with Article 4 No. 7 and 8 GDPR, fines for violations of the GDPR pursuant to Article 83(4) to (6) GDPR are not only to

processing of personal data is carried out in accordance with the GDPR. In doing so, the GDPR requires, among other things, that the nature and scope of the

regarding Articles 5(1)(b) GDPR and 5(1)(e) GDPR and held that national courts had to determine, using the factors of Article 6(4) GDPR, whether further processing

10 complainant (article 6.1 a) of the GDPR combined with article 7 of the GDPR), (2) article 6.1 c) of the GDPR in that the publication results on the

10 of the GDPR, but concerns children, who require specific protection with regard to personal data (recital 38 and Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR). vii. the

reprimand concerning the requirements for consent as required by Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. Datatilsynet examined a complaint regarding the processing of personal data

e) of the GDPR). 8.1.4. As for breaches of Articles 5.2. and 24 of the GDPR 88. Article 24.1 of the GDPR which covers Chapter IV of the GDPR devoted to

Articles 37.7, 38.1, 38.2 and 39.1 b) of the GDPR; - to issue an injunction against the public establishment compliance with Article 38.2 of the GDPR within six

all the persona data mentioned by virtue of Article 15(1) GDPR, in the lights of Recital (63) GDPR. Thus, the authority ruled that the lack of a complete

and GDPR. These issues are not discussed here. The question for the DPA to decide was whether Article 12(1) GDPR in conjunction with Article 15 GDPR requires

243. In order to strengthen the enforcement of the rules of the GDPR, recital 148 GDPR clarifies that penalties, including administrative fines, should

situation is warranted. In this respect, Recital 137 GDPR states 65 66See Article 77 GDPR. See Recital 137 GDPR. 28that an urgent need to act in order to

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

such data. 2 Recital 3. 3 Recital 5. 3 b. the rapid technological developments which have occurred during a period of globalisation.4 As Recital (6) explains:

compliance and accountability according to Article 5(1) GDPR, Article 5(2) GDPR and Article 6(1) GDPR. Since the company had totally ignored the its compliance

of the GDPR according to Art. 99 Para. 2 GDPR as of May 25, 2018 follows from Art. 79 Para. 2 Sentence 1 GDPR in conjunction with recital 22 GDPR as well

The appointment of such a representative shall not 38 THE EU GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION (GDPR), A Commentary, Edited by Kuner, Bygrave and Docksey

violations of the provisions of the GDPR. It should be borne in mind here that recital 146 sentence 3 of the GDPR requires a broad interpretation in order

Article 16 sentence 1 GDPR is the legal basis for a request for rectification, even if the request has been submitted before the GDPR entered into force:

Data, https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0033572/2013-03-01. 47See also recital 75 of the GDPR. 12/41Date Unidentified May 31, 2021 [CONFIDENTIAL] processing infringes

Protection Officer (Article 38.6 GDPR) and the insufficient involvement of the Data Protection Officer (Article 38.1 GDPR). On the procedural aspects of

[The equivalent GDPR Article to Article 48(3)(a) EU GDPR is Article 46(3)(a) GDPR, and Article 50(1)(d) EU GDPR is Article 49(1)(d) GDPR.] Share blogs or

5(1)(b) and (e), 9(2)(j), 89(1) GDPR and Section 7(1)(1) and (2)(1) GDPR. In particular, it follows from Article 9(2)(j) GDPR that the processing of data relating

Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. The Finish DPA further ordered the controller to bring its processing activities into compliance under Article 58(2)(d) GDPR. The controller

5(1)(f) GDPR, Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(2) GDPR, Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article 14 GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR, and Article 25 GDPR, as a result

5(1)(a) GDPR? Is the information relating to personal data processing operations easily accessible within the meaning of Articles 12 and 13 GDPR? Is the

to Article 13 (1) of the GDPR of what is written in paragraph Recital (39) of the GDPR and Article 5 (1) point a) of the GDPR stipulate that the information

Article 32 GDPR? - Does the fact that this health data is not encrypted constitute a breach of the security obligation under Article 32 GDPR? - Does the

from its database. The litigation chamber concluded to a violation of the GDPR considering that: - the controller did not stop the sending of direct marketing

outside the material scope of the GDPR. Also, with regards to the definition of personal data from Article 4(1) GDPR, the DPA did not reach a firm conclusion

prohibition of processing sensitive data under Article 9(2)? Were there any other GDPR violations incurred by the processing? The DPA held that there was no lawful

under Article 5(1)(a) and Article 5(2) GDPR respectively]. The Spanish DPA even made reference to Recital 40 GDPR on the legality of processing. The Spanish

Data Protection Regulation - GDPR). The defendant has a right of refusal under Art. 12 Para. 5 Sentence 2 Letter b) GDPR to. The provision only lists the

provided for in Infotv. Pursuant to Section 38 (3) (b), within the scope of its responsibilities under Section 38 (2) and (2a) as defined in this Act, in particular

view to vigorous enforcement of the rules of the GDPR. After all, as is clear from Recital 148 GDPR, the GDPR puts first and foremost that with every serious

However, the DPA concluded that the controller did not violate Article 15(2) GDPR by asking for more information to identify the data subject when the data

own security protocols. This therefore breached Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR. The initial sanction for infringing Article 5(1)(f) was a fine

found that customers’ order data is health data and fall within Article 9(1) GDPR. Amazon does not collect health data stricto sensu but it can draw conclusions

employees. The DPA found a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Following a visit to the premises of two public bodies

Articles 6, 7 and 12 of the GDPR. In the contested decision, the Belgian DPA found the infringement of Article 6, 7, 12, 13 and 24 GDPR sufficiently proven. In

on the merits 46/2024 - 10/16 reverted to Article 6.1. GDPR and recital 50 GDPR. In recital 50 GDPR8 is states that a separate legal basis is required for

and rights they may have in relation to the processing of personal data (recital 38 of the TYROM). Member States of the European Union have the additional

standard B-VG Art 133 Paragraph 4 DSG §24 DSG §4 GDPR Art 12 GDPR Art 15 GDPR Art 15 Paragraph 1 litc GDPR Art77 UWG §26b paragraph 1 B-VG Art. 133 today

understood. Article 15 of the GDPR belongs to Chapter III of the GDPR, entitled "The rights of the data subject". Recital 11 in the preamble states that

1, art. 25 sec. 1, art. 32 sec. 1 lit. b. and lit. d, art. 32 sec. 2, art. 38 sec. 1, art. 39 sec. 1 lit. b and art. 39 sec. 2, art. 30 sec. 1 lit. d, as

following fines: - €5,000 for the violation of Article 38(6) GDPR; - €8,000 for the violation of Article 13 GDPR; - €1,000 for the violation of Article 22(2) LSSI

of access under Article 15 GDPR? By denying the complainant access, did the respondent infringe Articles 12(1) or 12(2) GDPR? The NAIH that the complainant's

under Article 6(1) GDPR. In light of this, the DPA issued a fine of €70,000 to másLUZ Energía (SIE) by virtue of Article 83(5) GDPR for unlawful processing

constitute a violation of the GDPR? The AEPD held that the email constituted a confidentiality breach and violated Article 32 GDPR, as the law firm had failed

article 84.3 of the LGT, and the offenses typified in articles 38.3 c), d) and i) and 38.4 d), g) and h) of Law 34/2002, of July 11, on services of the

of the GDPR. 92. 92. Firstly, the restricted formation emphasises that, in this case, the criterion provided for in Article 83(2)(a) of the GDPR relating

(Article 37 GDPR) and the position of the official for data protection (Article 38 GDPR); • compliance with the obligation to cooperate (Article 31 GDPR and Article

same applies to the right to erasure under Article 17 of the GDPR. Recital 63 of the GDPR also supports this view. It shows that the legislator wants to

article 84.3 of the LGT, and the offenses typified in articles 38.3 c), d) and i) and 38.4 d), g) and h) of Law 34/2002, of July 11, on services of the

principle enclosed in Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. On this matter, the AEPD argued that, according to Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Recital 39 and Article 6(1)(f), an interest

constitutes personal data according with Article 4(1) GDPR therefore its processing falls within the scope of GDPR. The DPA also analysed whether the controller

as “anonymisation”. Recital 26 of the GDPR clarifies that anonymous information does not fall within the scope of the GDPR. The GDPR does not explicitly

time, which is a violation of the GDPR. As to the claim for damages, the CoS notes that though Article 82(1) of the GDPR states that full compensation for

whether Art. 15 GDPR applies to the investigation files at all, since according to Art. 2 Para. 2 d GDPR, Section 2a Para. 4 AO, the GDPR does not apply

which it is up to him to implement (article5.1.a) of the GDPR - explained in recital 39 of the GDPR). Different consequencesarising from one or the other

understood as references to the GDPR, in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. 34. Similarly, it follows from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

transparency), Article 12(1), Article 7, Article 13 and Article 14 GDPR, the corresponding GDPR recitals (32, 39, 42, 47, 58, 60, 61, and 72), as well are Articles

the principles of Article 5 GDPR is not cured by the existence of a legitimate purpose and legal basis (cf. GDPR 38/2004, GDPR 43/2019). In addition, the

Article 6 GDPR. The DPA established that notwithstanding that the controller has a legal basis for processing, processing is still in breach of the GDPR when

understood as made to the GDPR , in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. Similarly, it appears from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

ones processing. Decision on the merits 07/2021 - 14/25 10 recital 50 GDPR. Recital 50 of the GDPR states that this is a separate legal basis required for

violation of Article 12 GDPR ? Are the following practices an infringement on data subjects' information right as described in Article 12 GDPR ? Spreading the

and C”. 57See in particular Articles 5.1.a) and 12 of the GDPR, see also recital (39) of the GDPR. 58cf. points 11 and 12 of this decision. 59“Objective 2

protection of Art. 82 GDPR does not cover violations of Art. 13, 14, 15, 24, 25 and Art. 34 GDPR. In addition, there is no breach of the GDPR by the defendant

of the concept of personal data Article 4, 1) of the GDPR, as explained in Recital 26 of the GDPR, Opinion 4/2007 of the Decision on the merits 71/2020

controller for the purposes of Article 4(7) GDPR, and Company A was the processor for the purposes of Article 4(8) GDPR. The DPA found that both Companies A and

pages 38 to 82), in short, that:1. The CNPD cannot be considered as a national control authority under theterms of article 51, paragraph 1 of the GDPR, as

4 No. 1 GDPR. The query of this date in the order form on the plaintiff's homepage is also a processing operation within the meaning of the GDPR. Because

of Art. 9 GDPR do not apply because the plaintiff did not seek to process that kind of data. The legality is thus determined by Art. 6 GDPR. In the absence

Articles 6.1.C and 9.2.i) of the GDPR. 86. In accordance with Article 6.3 of the GDPR, read in the light of recital 41 of the GDPR, the processing of 26 personal

time limit for lodging an appeal (cf. § 90.1, 2 and § 93 of the BVerfGG). 38 The complainant is also entitled to lodge a complaint. He complains of an