Search results

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

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

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

(4.2) Exclusions (4.2.1) GDPR and AO restrictions 145 According to Art. 15 Para. 1 GDPR, the person concerned (Art. 4 No. 1 GDPR) has a right to information

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

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

Article 17(3) GDPR. Two doctors sued a platform for deletion of their basic profile set up on the platform without their consent under Article 17 GDPR. They argued

DPA initiated supervision pursuant to Article 56 GDPR in accordance with the Article 60 GDPR cooperation mechanism. The handover of the complaint was made

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

of Warsaw held that a car rental company could not rely on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR to process a customer's personal data with the view of defending itself against

(1) Data Protection Act - Next search term). 3 Previous search termGDPR; see also Recital 211: "This impact assessment should in particular address the measures

also supported by Recital 128 GDPR. Therefore, the court found the independent nature of the church supervisory authorities to be GDPR-compliant. Second

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

Swedish DPA held that a controller violated Article 12(3) GDPR by not responding to an Article 15 GDPR access request within the one month time limit. However

Article 82(1) GDPR, because the controller unlawfully disclosed the data to its customers. The court also held that under Article 82 GDPR the violation

regarded as an offer to conclude an amendment agreement within the meaning of § 145 BGB. A contract concluded by clicking on a button has in principle an individual

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

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