Search results

instance court against a decision taken by the EDPS. Should the decision be appealed by the data subject, this will then go to the Court of Justice (CJEU)

exercise or defence of legal claims, whether in court proceedings or in an administrative or out-of-court procedure. Recital 53: Processing Special Category

overturn or amend the contested decision. It is then not possible to appeal the decision by the Head of the DPA. This decision can then only be challenged

“pending in a court in another Member State”) any competent court other than the court first seized may suspend its proceedings. The courts are under no

tribunal for review. A tribunal decision may also be challenged and the case will then move forward in the Luxembourg court system. Complaints can be filed

where a decision of a supervisory authority implementing a decision of the Board is challenged before a national court and the validity of the decision of the

term ‘personal data’ as broad as possible. In this regard, the German Constitutional Court already in 1983 stated that "Under the conditions of automatic

is manifestly unfounded b) the subject of the complaint is reviewed by a court or law enforcement authority c) the complainant has not provided necessary

General Court held that transparency overrode data protection. However, on appeal, the CJEU ruled the other way and stated that the original decision to withhold

Article 15 GDPR. In a similar sense, the Regional Labour Court of the Land Baden-Württemberg in Germany has stated that the right to access includes information

concerned in the decision-making process. Where the decision is to reject the complaint by the data subject in whole or in part, that decision should be adopted

appealed to the Court of Appeal. The court granted the injunction but only in part. The court ordered the Federal Republic of Germany to refrain from storing

sufficient. The Court emphasized that inaction is insufficient to establish whether the consent is a “freely given and informed decision”. The Court concludes

and 102 TFEU, would require Germany to allow that GDPR fines may be initiated directly against an undertaking, despite Germany's administrative law requiring

and makes profits with advertisement in the game. It is very popular in Germany among the large Turkish diaspora. The GDPR applies to the processing of

subject appealed against this decision to the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court (OLG Schleswig-Holstein). The court ruled that the data subject was

The decision below is a machine translation of the German original. Please refer to the German original for more details. 33 O 376/22 District Court of

not sufficient (OLG Karlsruhe, decision of 21.05.2021, 15 Verg 4/21, juris, marginal no. 28; OLG Brandenburg, decision of 29.05.2012, Verg W 5/12, juris

companies brought an action against the decision before the Higher Regional Court in Düsseldorf, Germany (the Court). The Court referred to the CJEU for a preliminary

accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (the ‘Court of Justice’) and the European Court of Human Rights. Recital 42: Proof