Search results

regarding the security of processing, respectively art. 32 para. (4) in conjunction with art. 32 para. (1) and para. (2) of the General Data Protection Regulation

Norge violated Article 33 GDPR by failing to notify the Datatilsynet of the data breach? Had Telenor Norge violated Article 32(1) GDPR by failing to implement

that the controller had breached its obligations under Articles 5(1)(f), as well as 32(1) and (2). As a consequence, the ANSPDCP issued an administrative

there was a personal data breach pursuant to Article 4(12) GDPR. Moreover, it stated that Article 32(1) GDPR obliges controllers to take appropriate technical

reason, claimed that she shall receive the medical report under the veil of GDPR. The Cypriot Office of the Commissioner for Personal Data Protection disagreed

concluded that the controller violated Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(d), Article 32(2), and Article 32(4) GDPR. Therefore, the DPA decided to impose a

garden. The decision found that the HSE infringed Articles 5(1)(f) and 32(1) of the GDPR by failing to implement appropriate technical and organisational

in accordance with the rules in the Data Protection Regulation [1], Article 32 (1). 1. Below is a more detailed review of the case and a justification

activities further violated Article 32(1)(b) and (d) GDPR. Accordingly, the DPA, in accordance with its powers under Article 58 (2) GDPR, imposed an administrative

provisions of Article 32 paragraph (4) in conjunction with Article 32 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the GDPR, as well as of Article 33 paragraph (1) of the

that Cyprus Police was responsible for a violation of Article 32 par.1(b) & (d) and par.(4) GDPR, as a result of the acts and/or omissions of the Police

Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) fined leasing company €15,000 for violation of Article 32(1) and (2) GDPR after investigating a data breach reported by the company, where

this data breach a violation of Article 32(1) GDPR? The AEPD concluded that there was no violation of Article 32(1) GDPR, because the company had implemented

€283,000). It held that the controller violated Articles 25(1), 32(1)(b), 32(1)(d) and 32(2) GDPR by not taking appropriate technical and organizational security

violated Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and proved the ineffectivness of the controller's employee compliance training, in violation of Article 32 GDPR. The DPA

SE Register Center 15 thousand. A fine of EUR 1 million was imposed for infringements of Article 32 (1) (b) and (c) of the BDAR, ie failure to ensure

6 November 2020, has processed personal data in violation of Article 32(1) 1 of the GDPR by sending sensitive personal data to the complainant in an e-mail

infringement of article 32.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.4.a) of the RGPD, a fine of € 3,000 (three thousand euros), in accordance with article 73.g) of

assessed if it ensured an appropriate level of security under Articles 32(1) and 32(2) GDPR. The DPA held that the controller did not make a proper risk assessment

data. Hence, it considered Article 32(1)(a), Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(d) GDPR to be breached. Pursuant to Article 82(2) GDPR, the DPA took several aggravating