Search results

morespecifically the articulation between article 15.4 of the GDPR and recital 63 of the GDPR, as well asbalancing the right to access and obtain data against

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

serious breach of the GDPR. The violation of Article 17, 1., a) constitutes also a violation of an essential principle of the GDPR and constitutes at least

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

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

Adopted 13 GDPR for processing on foot of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR . The IE recalls the general requirement of transparencyunder Article5(a)GDPR 54,anditsp

member states is superimposed (see Recital 146 S 4 and 5 on the GDPR; cf. also Frenzel in Paal / Pauly, GDPR-BDSG3 Art 82 GDPR margin no.1; Wybitul / Haß / Albrecht

accordance with Article 6(2) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR for adaptation to the application of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(1)(e) GDPR. The court stressed that

Article 6.1 GDPR, read in conjunction with Articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR; 5) the performance of a data protection impact assessment (Article 35 GDPR) the framework

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

Information Acts and the GDPR. Due to the questions of EU law raised by the case with regard to Article 23(1)(e) GDPR and Article 23(1)(j) GDPR, the BVerwG had

the provisions of the GDPR, in particular Article 5 (1) GDPR, article 24 and article 28 GDPR, all this based on article 58.2, d) GDPR and article 100, §1

Administrative Court's application of Article 16 GDPR. The Administrative Court had correctly assumed that, while Article 16 GDPR was applicable, it could not be established

therefore violated Articles 9(1) GDPR out of negligence. The DPA fined the controller €1,600,000 pursuant of Article 83(5)(a) GDPR and considered this a high

addition to or instead of the appropriate measures imposed. 79 This same recital 79Recital148 states that in this context: "In order to strengthen the enforcement

95/46/EC (hereinafter: general data protection regulation or GDPR), and Article 6 (1) of the GDPR. 2. The Authority finds that Customer 1 violated the principle

5(1)(f) GDPR and a fine of €100,000 for the violation of Article 37 GDPR. The DPA issued a reprimand for the violations of Article 5(1)(e) GDPR and Article

point b) GDPR and Article 100, §1, 5 ° WOG to be reprimanded for the infringement of Article 25 (1) GDPR; b. on the basis of Article 83 GDPR and Articles

applicants' rights. Consequently, the Ministry violated Article 32 GDPR and Article 24 GDPR. The DPA also found that visa applicants were insufficiently informed

of the GDPR. The scope of application of the GDPR is opened pursuant to Art. 2 and Art. 3 of the GDPR. Recital21 Pursuant to Art. 2(1) of the GDPR, the Regulation