Search results

consent under Article 6(4) GDPR and further processing for a compatible purpose under Article 6(4) GDPR. See the commentary on Article 6(4) GDPR for details

possible "legitimate interest" under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Equally to Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR require that Union or Member State

such processing was falling under the household exemption (Article 2(2)(c) GDPR), and that the GDPR therefore did not apply. For this reason, the Icelandic

surveillance cameras could fall outside of the scope of the GDPR in line with Article 2(2)(c) GDPR (i.e. processing of personal data "by a natural person in

of the GDPR, which is a condition for a reprimand pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Material scope of the GDPR According to the court, the GDPR applies

document. Concerning the first question, the DPA held that under Article 2(2)(d) GDPR, the Regulation does not apply to the processing of personal data

minimization. Therefore, the controller violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(1) GDPR considering that the first camera was also

household activity (as referred to in Article 2 (2) (c) of the GDPR). This means that the provisions of the GDPR and the GDPR Implementation Act apply to the

restrictions. Hence, the exemption to the material scope of the GDPR set in Article 2(2)(c) GDPR could not apply in the case at hand. The Icelandic DPA then

(1) GDPR declares that the GDPR is applicable in addition to the GDPR, without referring to the exceptions in Article 2 (2), (3) and (4) of the GDPR. In

Defence and falls outside the scope of Union law, as foreseen in Article 2(2)(a) GDPR. More precisely, the processing is subject to the specific provisions

regulations 2. On May 24, 2016, Regulation 2016/979 (General Data Protection Regulation) (hereinafter: GDPR ) entered into force. The GDPR has been applicable

are to become part of a file. According to para. Article 4 Act no. 90/2018, Coll. paragraph 2 (c) Article 2 of the Regulation, the Act and the Regulation

of personal data mentioned in Article 2 (2) GDPR are not relevant. Contrary to the plaintiff's view, Article 2(2)(d) GDPR does not apply in the present

access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), erasure (Article 17 GDPR), restriction (Article 18 GDPR), notification (Article 19 GDPR) or data

decision". Similar to the ex-ante information in Article 13(2)(f) and 14(2)(f) GDPR, Article 15(2) GDPR requires that in case the controller transfers data

(see Article 52 GDPR) and shall be provided with various competencies (Articles 55, 56 GDPR), tasks (Article 57 GDPR) and powers (Article 58 GDPR). For

reliance on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR or at least exercise the right to object under Article 21 GDPR. If the legal basis is Article 6(1)(f) GDPR (i.e. 'legitimate

are dealt with in Article 12(6) GDPR. It is unclear why Article 12(2) GDPR refers to Articles 15 to 22 GDPR, while Article 11(2) GDPR only refers to Articles

flows by the SA pursuant to Article 58(2) GDPR or failure to provide access in violation of Article 58(1) GDPR. Article 83(6) GDPR is a superfluous provision