Search results

defined under Article 2(1)(a) Directive 95/46 where a third party has additional knowledge required to identify a data subject. b) Whether Article 7(1)(f) prevents

under Article 3(1) Directive 95/46. The court looked at the term personal data under Article 3(1) Directive 95/46 and Article 2(a) Directive 95/46 which

light of Article 4 of Directive 95/46, which sets out that each Member State has to apply the national provisions it adopts pursuant to Directive 95/46 to the

to transfer of personal data according to Article 25 Directive 95/46. Whether the provisions of Directive 95/46 are in conflict with the general principles

scope of the Data Protection Directive 95/46 under the exceptions stipulated in Article 3(2) of the Data Protection Directive 95/46? (2) Whether personal data

binding obligation of secrecy. Recital 171: Repeal of Directive 95/46/EC and Transition Phase Directive 95/46/EC should be repealed by this Regulation. Processing

particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’), Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

previous Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC. Some of the principles are also reflected in Article 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter),

referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); (i) to authorise administrative arrangements referred to in point (b) of Article 46(3); (j) to approve binding

implement aspects of the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive. Article 3(2) of the previous Directive 95/46/EG already exempted the rather sensitive area of

requirements from Article 9(2) and Article 9 (3) GDPR, but will also require an additional concomitant legal basis contained in Article 6(1) GDPR. However

previously existing definition under Article 2 (a) Directive 95/46/EC. The Directive itself derives the definition from Article 2 (a) Convention 108, according

between Article 21(3) GDPR and Article 17 GDPR on the right to erasure must be considered. The tight relationship between Article 21(3) and Article 17(1)(c)

establishes that Directive 95/46/EC applies to matters not covered by the provisions of the EPD. Given that Article 94 GDPR repeals Directive 95/46/EC and replaces

Article 94 - Repeal of Directive 95/46/EC 1. Directive 95/46/EC is repealed with effect from 25 May 2018. 2. References to the repealed Directive shall

access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), deletion (Article 17 GDPR), restriction of processing (Article 18 GDPR), objection (Article 21 GDPR)

subject (Article 12(2) GDPR), respond and communicate the measures taken (Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR), the principle of freedom from costs (Article 12(5)

pass a national data protection act that was aligned with Directive 95/46/EC. Directive 95/46/EC allowed Member States to adapt the rules to national frameworks

and to the well-being of natural persons. Recital 3: Directive 95/46/EC Harmonisation Goal Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

legislator or intended. Compared with the previous Directive 95/46, Article 15(3) GDPR constitutes an additional right to receive a copy of all personal data

GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November 2019 (Version 2.1), p. 6-7 (available here). EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12

for such performance. Article 7 GDPR regulates the "conditions for consent". It specifies the definition of consent set out in Article 4(11) GDPR and, by

decisions adopted pursuant to Article 45(3) of this Regulation and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC; (b) Chapter VII on cooperation

(“EDPB”). The EDPB replaces the Article 29 Working Party (“WP29”), the former advisory body established under Directive 95/46/EC. Notably, the powers granted

decisions adopted pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC. 5. The Commission shall, where

operations. Recital 89: Abolishment of Indiscriminate General Notification Directive 95/46/EC provided for a general obligation to notify the processing of personal

processing (Article 36(3)(c) GDPR); the contact details of the Data Protection Officer (DPO) (Article 36(3)(d) GDPR); a copy of the DPIA (Article 36(3)(e) GDPR)

processed. 3. Adherence to an approved code of conduct as referred to in Article 40 or an approved certification mechanism as referred to in Article 42 may

Category:Article 33 GDPR There was no equivalent to Article 33 GDPR under the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC. Indeed, Article 17 of the Directive only

Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data established by Directive 95/46/EC. It should consist of the head of a supervisory authority of each

Laundering Directive and the Europol Regulation. Noting that a broader reading of Article 98 GDPR is supported by the wording of Article 2(3) GDPR, which

decisions in Category:Article 25 GDPR The Data Protection Directive did not contain a similar provision. Although Article 17 DPD Recital 46 had a similar thrust

and freedoms of individuals", as stated in Article 35(1) and further elucidated in Article 35(3) and Article 35(4) GDPR. The WP29 developed a list of criteria

those answers prove to be inaccurate, within the meaning of Article 6(1)(d) of Directive 95/46, for example due to the fact that, by mistake, the examination

other binding obligation of secrecy. Article 10 GDPR is a complementary provision to the Law Enforcement Directive (LED). It aims to ensure that criminal

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ("CFR"), as well as Directive 95/46/EC. In the event that such verification is successful, the agreement

exercising of powers of SAs. It concerned the interpretation of Article 28 GDPR of Directive 95/46, the GDPR predecessor. It stays relevant with regard to concepts

point of legislative history, Article 85 GDPR is a development of Article 9 of the 95/46 directive of the European Union. Article 9 obliged Member States to

The roots of Article 39 GDPR can be partially retraced to the GDPR’s predecessor, the Directive 95/46/EC (DPD). In particular, Article 18 DPD mentioned

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 38 GDPR, p. 702 (Oxford University Press 2020). In addition, although Directive 95/46/EC did not require organisations

withdraw consent under Article 7(3), object under Article 21 GDPR or if the processing is in fact compliant with the principles of Article 5(1) GDPR. Simply

decisions in Category:Article 34 GDPR As with that provision, there was no equivalent to Article 34 GDPR in the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC. Additionally

policy under Article 13 should not be too long. Article 12 GDPR may be limited by Union or national Law in accordance with Article 23 GDPR. Article 12(1) GDPR

(e.g. Article 25 (1) and (2), Article 28(1), Article 32(1) GDPR, Article 89(1) GDPR). These measures can also be regarded as measures under Article 24(1)

proceedings under Article 79 GDPR can be brought both against a controller (as defined under Article 4(7) GDPR) and a processor (as defined under Article 4(8) GDPR)

point, it is important to note that Article 13(1)(f) GDPR, Article 14(1)(f) GDPR, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR and Article 15(2) GDPR, make specific reference

the relevance of Article 29 GDPR were rooted in the fact that Article 28(3)(b) GDPR already seems to cover much of the scope of Article 29 GDPR. More specifically

practices published under Article 70(3) GDPR. Though Article 70(3) GDPR already obliges the EDPB to make these public, Article 71(2) GDPR ensures that the

the processing prohibition in Article 58 (2) (f) of the GDPR. Article 58 of the GDPR replaced Article 28(3) of Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals

see commentary to Article 51(3) GDPR bellow. Article 8(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ("CFR") and Article 16(2) of the Treaty

to Article 42(7); (p) specify the requirements referred to in Article 43(3) with a view to the accreditation of certification bodies under Article 42;

Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data established by Directive 95/46/EC. It should consist of the head of a supervisory authority of each

shall apply from 25 May 2018. There is no relevant recital for Article 99 GDPR. Article 99 GDPR sets out the dates of the Regulation's entry into force

Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). See Ziebarth, in Sydow, Marsch, DS-GVO/BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin numbers

information society service(s)." According to Article 4(25) GDPR, which in turn refers to Article 1(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/1535, an "information society service"

ECJ on household exceptions under the GDPR (Article 3(2) Directive 95/46/EC), which corresponds to Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. While the Austrian legislator

and (3) GDPR), inform him or her about the measures taken (Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR), the right to receive this service free of charge (Article 12(5)

Category:Article 37 GDPR The notion of appointing a DPO has its roots in Article 18(2) of the Data Protection Directive 1995 (Directive 95/46/EC) (DPD)

assessment should not be mandatory. Article 22 GDPR has its roots in Articles 12a and 15 of the 95/46/EC Data Protection Directive (DPD). One of the main differences

procedure under Article 65(3)(2) GDPR could also be applied to decisions made by the EDPB. The procedural regulations in Article 65(3)(2) GDPR establish

with Article 13, Article 14 GDPR gives expression to the principle of transparency enshrined in Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and further defined in Article 12 GDPR

to in Article 46(2)(d) GDPR, contractual clauses referred to in Article 46(3)(a) GDPR, or binding corporate rules within the meaning of Article 47 GDPR

compliance. Article 40 GDPR elaborates upon a pre-existing provision under the Directive 95/46/EC (Data Protection Directive – DPD), specifically Article 27(1)

that process them. This was already the case under Article 8(7) of the DPD, the precursor of Article 87 GDPR. In many Member States, the processing of NIN

Chair of the Board. Article 75 GDPR establishes the existence of, and governs the functioning of the secretariat of the Board. Article 75 GDPR outlines the

the code. Although the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (DPD) included a provision on codes of conduct (Article 27(1) DPD), this did not include any information

organisation), Article 45(5) GDPR (revocation, change of such determinations); Articles 46(2)(c) and (d) GDPR (standard protection clauses); Article 47(3) GDPR

approach in regards to the EDPB. Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ("CFR") and Article 15(3) Treaty on the Functioning of

decisions in Category:Article 74 GDPR For more on this point, see Article 72 GDPR. Dix in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 74 GDPR, margin number

hybrid of regulation and directive.” Whilst it establishes an EU-wide penalty regime for violations under Article 83 GDPR, Article 84(1) GDPR dispenses with

dispute resolution mechanism under Article 65 GDPR in connection with Article 63 GDPR is triggered (Article 60 (4) GDPR). Article 60(2) GDPR clarifies that also

in point (d) of Article 46(2) and in Article 28(8); (e) aims to authorise contractual clauses referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); or (f) aims to

right to receive compensation under Article 82 GDPR was not included in the initial draft of Article 80 GDPR (then Article 73) and was only inserted later

that falls outside the scope of Article 57 GDPR should be deemed inadmissible for the purposes of Article 31 GDPR. Article 31 GDPR can be read as a supporting

out pursuant to Article 83(1) GDPR. This part of Article 83 concerns the principle of "unity of action" (see above). With Article 83(3) GDPR, the legislator

(subjective requirement of the damage) mentioned by Article 82(3), to which we refer. The first sentence of Article 82(2) states that a controller involved in processing

referred to in Article 64. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2). Recital

rules, do not fall within the scope of this article. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 48 GDPR Kuner, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey,

restriction of processing carried out in accordance with Article 16, Article 17(1) and Article 18 to each recipient to whom the personal data have been

derogation from Article 64(3) and Article 65(2), an urgent opinion or an urgent binding decision referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article shall be adopted

to in Article 42(5) and approved by the supervisory authority which is competent pursuant to Article 55 or 56 or by the Board pursuant to Article 63; (c)

confidentiality obligations were already in place under Article 28(7) of the GDPR's predecessor, Directive 95/46/EC. Article 54(1) GDPR mandates Member States to provide

the exchange of knowledge between them. This way, Article 50 GDPR expands the exhortation under Article 57(1)(g) GDPR that calls for cooperation between

Press 2020). Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. CJEU

for the data subject (Article 57(3) GDPR). Pötters, Werkmeister in Gola, DS-GVO, Article 77 GDPR, margin number 4 (C.H. Beck 2022, 3rd edition). CJEU - C-132/21

of the notion of religion in general. For instance, under Article 10(1)(b) of Directive 2011/95/EU, “[t]he concept of religion shall in particular include

the meaning of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure set out in Article 93(2). Recital 110:

in compliance with the GDPR. Article 28(3)(h) GDPR enables such a task in case processors are used. According to Article 28(3)(h) GDPR, the processor should

absence of an adequacy decision pursuant to Article 45(3), or of appropriate safeguards pursuant to Article 46, including binding corporate rules, a transfer

under the terms referred to in Article 46(2)(f) GDPR. One substantial difference between Article 42(1) GDPR and Article 42(2) GDPR is that in the former

this Article. 2.   The delegation of power referred to in Article 12(8) and Article 43(8) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period

protection principles (Article 5), determination of the legal basis for processing (Article 6), implementation of security measures (Article 32), notification

GDPR (Article 31 GDPR). Direct liability of the representative is limited to the obligations set out in Article 30 and Article 58(1)(a) GDPR. Article 27(5)

certain standards of clarity (Article 61(3) GDPR). Requests are imperative and, subject to specific exceptions (Article 61(4) and (5) GDPR), must be fulfilled

subjects - which would be counterproductive. Article 11 GDPR is meant to address this matter. Under Article 11(1) GDPR, when a processing operation does

on the interests of the hosting State within the meaning of Article 346(1) TFEU. Article 62(3) GDPR foresees two main forms of joint operations: (i) conferring

and 14 GDPR), access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), erasure (Article 17 GDPR), restriction of processing (Article 18 GDPR), notification

information in the course of an investigation, in accordance with Article 58(1) GDPR. Article 90 GDPR was drafted with a view to regulate potential conflicts

commentary to Article 60 GDPR, Article 61 GDPR, Article 62 GDPR, Article 63 GDPR, Article 64 GDPR, Article 65 GDPR, Article 66 GDPR and Article 56 GDPR. The

studies. Hence, Article 89(2) and (3) GDPR also allow for specific derogation to the GDPR for these purposes, as further detailed below. Article 89(1) GDPR

cases concerning the interpretation of Article 28(1) of Directive 95/46/EC ("DPD"), the Regulation's predecessor. Article 28(1) DPD established the existence

DSGVO, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 3 (Jan Sramek 2021). Bergt in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition)

opening clause under Article 88(1) GDPR, any rules introduced must meet the criteria imposed by Article 88(2) GDPR. Lastly, Article 88(3) GDPR imposes an obligation

incompatible occupation. For example, Article 52(2) GDPR requires SA members to remain free from external influence and Article 52(3) GDPR entails a prohibition

DS-GVO BDSG, Article 78 GDPR, margin number 6 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition); Körffer in Paal, Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 78 GDPR, margin numbers 3-5, (C.H

required in principle (see hereunder Article 65(2) GDPR) to adopt a decision under Article 65 GDPR is reached, since Article 64 GDPR only requires a simple majority

processing), Article 57 GDPR (tasks of SAs), Article 58 GDPR (powers of SAs), as well as Article 65 GDPR (dispute resolution by the board), Article 63 GDPR (consistency

consent pursuant to point (a) of Article 6(1) or point (a) of Article 9(2) or on a contract pursuant to point (b) of Article 6(1); and (b) the processing is

the functioning of decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) or Article 26(4) of Directive 95/46/EC. In its adequacy decisions, the Commission should

terms should the weighting provided for in Article 7.f) of Directive 95/46 / EC be carried out -current article 6.1.f) of the General Regulation (EU) - between

conclusion follows from reading Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy directive in conjunction with Article 2(h) of Directive 95/46/EC, and noting that active consent

considered the controller (Article 2(d) Directive 95/46) in respect of the processing (within the meaning of Article 2(b) Directive 95/46) that it carries out

controller in Article 82 of French Data Protection Act, which is justified by the reference made by Article 2 of the ePrivacy Directive to Directive 95/46/EC on

definition set out under Article 2(d) Directive 95/46 and that NRW did not have legal standing to bring a class action suit under Directive 95/46. The Higher Regional

other countries, although it contemplated several exceptions. Following Directive 95/46/EC, the Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos de Carácter Personal (Organic

literary purposes, only Article 24, Article 26, Article 28, Article 29, Article 32, and Article 40- Article 43 applies, following § 3. Special categories of

Google LLC violated Articles 5 et seqq. GDPR in connection with Article 28(3)(a) and Article 29 GDPR. The DSB fully upheld the complaint with regard to the

journalistic purposes within the meaning of Article 9 of Directive 95/46; (3) Whether Article 17 and principles of Directive 95/46 preclude publication of data collected

not be based on Article 45. Article 46.1 provides, among other things, that in the absence of a decision in accordance with Article 45.3 a personal data

Schedule 2 states that the GDPR provisions Article 13(1) to (3), Article 14(1) to (4) and Article 15(1) to (3) do not apply to personal data consisting

established on Article 45. Article 46.1 provides, among other things, that in the absence of a decision in accordance with Article 45.3 a personal data

case must be qualified as the EU controller as referred to in Article 2(d) of Directive 95/46. 40 The fact that the Administrator of a Fan Page uses the Facebook

this context Article 29 of the Data Protection Act 2019 establishes exceptions in Article 9(1) GDPR, Article 15 GDPR, Article 16 GDPR, Article 18(1)(a) GDPR

documents: its Article 2 lit c refers to Directive 95/46/EC (now the GDPR) and leaves it unaffected. Art 4(1)(f) and Art 5(d) of Directive 2011/24/EU explicitly

Thus, article 1, paragraph 2, of the "ePrivacy" directive provides that "the provisions of this directive specify and supplement Directive 95/46/EC" of

passed the first data protection law in 1979 (BGBl I Nr. 565/1978). Directive 95/46/EC was implemented by the Data Protection Act 2000 (Datenschutzgesetz

These acts were replaced in 2000 with the national implementation of Directive EC/95/46 through the Act on Processing of Personal Data (Persondataloven).

public interest grounds referred to in Article 8(4) of Directive 95/46 or in Article 9(2)(g) of Directive 95/46. Regulation 2016/679 and in compliance

personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). An English translation is available

either. 3.4. The right of inspection that was previously laid down in article 12 of the Privacy Directive 95/46 has now been included in article 15 of the

not be based on Article 45. Article 46.1 provides, among other things, that in the absence of a decision in accordance with Article 45.3 a personal data

Therefore, given that Article 6(1), Article 5(1)(a), Article 5(1)(d), Article 5(1)(c), and Article 14 GDPR were infringed in connection to Article 5(1)(b), the

GDPR, Article 9 GDPR, Article 10 GDPR, Article 30 GDPR and Article 34 GDPR, as well as the provision of the PDPA governing processing of personal data

not be based on Article 45. Article 46.1 provides, among other things, that in the absence of a decision in accordance with Article 45.3 a personal data

imprisonment.
 
 
 The DPA
 The DPA was enacted pursuant to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995

is applicable. Article 2(2)(a) and (b) of the GDPR represents partly a continuation of the first indent of Article 3(2) of Directive 95/46. Therefore, the

such data and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter “GDPR”); In view of the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

and 6 of Directive 95/46/EC remains relevant to this day. Article 6.1 of the GDPR in fact repeats the terms of article 7 of the directive 95/46/EC - the

not answer this question. 3 Decision The high Council: - answers the questions in the manner described above in 3.1.11 and 3.2.3; - estimates the costs of

repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Regulation on the free movement of data protection), hereinafter referred to as RGPD ; Having regard to the law of 3 December

complaint under Article 77 GDPR was very clear and limited in scope. However, the DSB went on to assert a violation of Article 12 GDPR and Article 15(1)(h) GDPR

the nation of legitimate interests of the data controller under Article 7 of Directive 95/46 / EC, pp. 16-17. It is quite clear that email addresses are not

and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter referred to as the AVG; Having regard to the law of 3 December 2017

affects him or her. The provision is modelled on its predecessor, Article 15 of Directive 95/46/EC. According to its wording, it appears to be a right of the

was a controller within the definition of a controller under Article 2(d) of Directive 95/46. The company offered educational services through a fan page

"controller" in Article 82 of the Data Protection Act, which is justified by the reference made by Article 2 of the ePrivacy Directive to Directive 95/46/EC on the

paragraph 38 ff, in particular paragraph 46 f on Article 12 lit a of Directive 95/46). In this regard, the ECJ (in RZ 46) states: "If the person's right of access

2, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3

the e-Privacy Directive refers to Directive 95/46/EC, and in accordance with art. 94,paragraph 2 AVG should all references to Directive 95/46 / EC should

meaning of the first paragraph of Article 2 of Directive 2002/58, read in conjunction with Article 2(b) of Directive 95/46. The information therefore was

right of access previously laid down in Article 12 of the Privacy Directive 95/46 has now been included in Article 15 of the AVG. The purpose of this right

the obligations and safeguards of Directive 95/46 and Regulation 2016/679 (GDPR). The Court explained that the Directive and GDPR do not indicate that EU

aforementioned Directive refers to Directive 95/46/EC (Data Protection Directive), which is decisive for the processing of personal data (ErwGr. 89, Art. 95 of Directive

of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter 'the Regulation')

"ePrivacy" directive and the GDPR, Article 1(2) of this directive provides that "the provisions of this directive specify and supplement Directive 95/46/EC "of

such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (hereinafter the "DGPS");Considering the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

delist an article based on the "right to be forgotten". The AEPD issued a decision related to the right to be forgotten under Directive 95/46/EC. Google

verification of its correctness and to an amendment under Article 12 (b) of Directive 95/46. 46. ​​In those circumstances, extending the right of access

application of the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC and was further specified there (see Articles 2, 4, 6, 7, 12 and 14 DSRL 95/46/EC; see ECJ, judgment of 13

and 5 (3) of Directive 2002/58, read in conjunction with Article 2 (h) of Directive 95/46 and Regulation 2016/679 4 Article 6 (11) and Article 6 (1) (a)

violation of Article 6(1) GDPR; 2. Did not provide the complainant with enough information prior to the processing, in violation of Article 13 GDPR; 3. Processed

free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (the General Data Protection Regulation), are: Article 5 Principles for the processing of personal

data subject is a child. " (49) Article 6 continues the corresponding provision in the previously applicable Directive 95/46 / EC of 24 October 1995. Practices

articulation. Thus, Article 1(2) of the ePrivacy Directive provides that the provisions of this Directive specify and supplement Directive 95/46/EC of the European

taken pursuant to paragraph 3 of this article and of decisions taken on the basis of Article 25(6) of the Directive 95/46/EC. 5. When the information available

provisions of Articles 1 (3) and 15 (1) of the said Directive No. 2002/58 , which provide for the following: Article 1 3 - This Directive does not apply to activities

such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (general regulation on data protection), hereinafter GDPR; Considering the law of 3 December 2017 creating

provided for in Article 5(1)(a), (e) and (f), Article 5(2), Article 24(1) and (2), Article 28(3), Article 30(1)(d) and (f) and Article 32(1) of the General

20See Article 29 Working Party, Opinion 06/2014 on the notion of legitimate interests of the data controller under Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC (WP

Chapter 1.3.3 and Annex 2D, and Annex 3 of the complainant's opinion of 22 January 2019 (OZ 1 p 52, 83 ff and 185 ff). The findings regarding 1.3. are based

removed by the lender'. 3.5.13.3. The Minister's response in 2011 as well as in 2017, at the time of the implementation of Directive 95/46/EC, indicates that

controller’s new privacy policy violated Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive (Directive 2002/58/EC). The Article only allows the controller to process

Protection Directive (EU Directive 2002/58 / EC, ePrivacy Directive) and Electronic Communications Act § 2-7 b, which implement Article 5 (3) of the Communication

to Article 7(e) of Directive 95/46/EC remains relevant to this day. Article 6(1) of the GDPR takes over the wording from Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC

expense, which would also be contrary to the conditions laid down in Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/48, which requires that measures to ensure the respect of

including Article 129 WEC which implements Article 5.3 of Directive 2002/5815 (hereinafter, "ePrivacy Directive"), in accordance with Article 14 § 1 of

install such a system at its own expense, which is also a breach of "Article 3(1) Directive 2004/48, which requires that measures to ensure the respect of IP

are, by definition, personal data within the meaning of Article 2(a) Directive 95/46, now Article 4(1) GDPR since they must enable Constantin Film Verleih

relevant even though Directive 95/46 was repealed since this condition of necessity is maintained under Article 6.1 b) to f) of the GDPR. Article 6.1 of the GDPR

such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter GDPR; Having regard to the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

communication, the data subject cannot rely on either Article 12 (a),of Directive 95/46 or of Article 8 (2) of the Charter the right to obtain a copy of theoriginal

with the principlesthe quality of the data laid down in Article 6 of Directive 95/46 or Article 5Regulation 20161679 and, on the other hand, to the basic

processing of personal data, on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC [the General Data Protection Regulation]) require, in addition to

referred Question 1 Is Article 1(15)(c) of Directive (EU) 2018/843, amending the first subparagraph of Article 30(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention

approved appeal of Article 5(1)(a), Article 12(1), Article 13(1) and Article 13(2). The appeal for Article 5(1)(c), Article 6(1) and Article 8 GDPR was not

02/2021 - 14/26 3. Motifs 3.1 Compétence de la Chambre de Résolution des Litiges (Article 2 AVG ; Article 4 WOG) 55. Conformément à l'article 2, paragraphe

species. Article 6.1 of the GDPR in fact reproduces the terms of Article 7 of Directive 95/46 / EC 10 of which it is the equivalent. 51. The Article 29 Group

by virtue of Article 29 of Directive 95/46/CE, which with the entry into force of article 94.2 of the RGPD that repeals the directive 95/46 is changed to

such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (general regulation on the data protection), hereinafter GDPR; Considering the law of 3 December 2017 creating

the means 8. A first plea is based on the violation of Article 28. I and 28.3, Article 32 and Article 44 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament

administrative documents , to which Directive 95/46 is not directed (ECJ, ibid., para. 46). 92 The ECJ also clarifies that the directive leaves it up to the member

access to Article 12 of the Privacy Directive (95/46/EC), which directive has been replaced by the GDPR, the purpose of the Privacy Directive, as the court

in accordance with Article 21 paragraph 2, d) the personal data were processed unlawfully, [...]' . In paragraph 3 of the same article it is defined that

Para. 1 and Para. 2, Art. Article 25(1), Article 30(5), Article 32(1) and (2), Article 34(1), Article 35(1) and Article 35(3). or Art. 37 Para. 1 lit.

possible violation of Article 82 of the French Data Protection Act, which in turn implements Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive into the French legal

data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter AVG; Having regard to the Act of 3 December 2017 establishing

and to the revocation of Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter “GDPR”; Having regard to the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

the Legal Professional Privilege Exception: The purpose of Directive 95/46/EC (the Directive) was to regulate the activities of data controllers on a territorial

decision on Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereinafter: the Charter) in relation to Article 22 of Directive 95/46 / EU

repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Regulation on the free movement of data protection), hereinafter referred to as RGPD ; Having regard to the law of 3 December

repeal of Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) Article 1, paragraph 2, Article 5, Article 6, paragraph 1, subparagraph f, Article 17(1)(a)

of personal data, on the free movement of data and on the repeal of Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation - Regulation (EU) 2016/679 -

95/46 that the LOPD made at that point, article 7.f) of the Directive was of direct application. Article 7.f) of Directive 95/46, the text of which was practically

instruction, under Article 28(1) GDPR. Thus, it has not been decided on whether or not MaCom could process information in accordance with Article 6(3)(a), (1)(a)

cross-border traffic. The case was decided under the national implementation of 95/46/EC. The investigation started after the DPA was notified of a personal data

processing personal data, on the free movement of data and on the repeal of Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter : "GDPR"), OJ

{kenk DOS 2019-06201) dismissing her complaint on the basis of Article 95 § 1, 3 of the Act of 3 December 2017 establishing the Data Protection Authority {hereinafter

its legal basis under Article 6(1)(f) The Disputes Chamber proceeds to dismiss the complaint in accordance with article 95 , § 1, 3° WOG, giving three motives

14.2 that § 3 continues the legal situation that followed from the Personal Data Act 2000 § 7 and the EU Privacy Directive 95/46 / EC Article 9. The provision

and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Regulation on Data Protection), hereinafter referred to as the DPA; Having regard to the Law of 3 December 2017

of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC, "General Data Protection Regulation" (hereinafter: "Regulation");

data, as well as the free circulation of such data and which repeals Directive 95/46 / EC, "General Data Protection Regulation" (hereinafter the "Regulation");

data (in hereafter GDPR) - repealing Directive 95/46/CE (RGPD) - and the provisions in article 22 of Organic Law 3/2018, of December 5. On the other hand

(f), Article 5(2), Article 6(1), Article 7(1), Article 24(1), Article 25(1), Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(c) and Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(c) and

2016/679 ", p. 3, Group Article 29 of Directive 95/46 / EC with document no. 1 8 / EN / WP 262 of 06-02-201 8 entitled "Guidelines on Article 49 of Regulation

least one of the legal bases provided for by Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC and Article 6.1(b) of that Directive further requires that the purposes must comply

Protection Ordinance Article 5, paragraph Article 5 (2) 1, letter c and letter f., Article 5, paragraph Article 6 (1) (a) Article 32 (1), (1), (33) 1 and

interpretation of Article 55(3) GDPR would not cover this as judicial activity. Therefore, the complaint is not admissible in accordance with Article 130 Paragraph

In that regard, neither the wording of Article 2(d) of Directive 95/46, nor any other provision of that directive, permits the conclusion that the purposes

personal data personnel and the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC; Having regard to the law of 1 August 2018 on the organization

security and to prevent the 42See Directive 95/46/EC, Recital 46. Underlining the AP. 43See, among other things, caseZ2003-0145,p.3. 44 45See CBP Guidelines: Security

The case was brought under Directive 95/46. It is remarkable that the Supreme Court held, that ready under Directive 95/46 consent that was required in

personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, with the

movement of such data and on repealing the Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) SL EU L119. 3 Article 6 of the General Data Protection Regulation

data, as well as the free movement of such data and which repeals the directive 95/46 / CE (General data protection regulation); Given the Legislative Decree

processing of personal data, on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)). The storage of the plaintiff's

such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter GDPR; Having regard to the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

movement of such data and on repealing the Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) SLEU L119 and Article 34 of the Law on the Implementation of

of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (general regulation on the protection of data) (Acts. Office. EU

established in Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR. Therefore, the Belgian DPA found the controller to have breached Article 15 GDPR in conjunction with Article 12(3) and

of personal data, on the free movement of data and on the repeal of Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation, OJ L 119/1 of May 4, 2016

with Article 5 paragraph 1 point c, Article 9 paragraph 1, Article 58 paragraph 2 point f, point g and point i and with Article 83 paragraph 2 and 3, Article

objection for data processing under Article 21 GDPR and the principle of liability under Article 2(4) GDPR and Article 24 GDPR. The complainant, the data

data data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (hereinafter referred to as the General Protection Regulation data) SL EU 119, Article 34 of the Law on the Implementation

data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General data protection regulation) SL EU L119. The General Data Protection Regulation in Article 4, Paragraph 1, Point

data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter referred to as the GDPR; Pursuant to the Act of 3 December 2017 establishing

regard to the processing of personal data – 3 – and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)

for violating Article 5(1)(c) and Article 5(1)(e) GDPR. The DPA of Berlin fined Deutsche Wohnen SE for violating Article 5(1)(c) and Article 5(1)(e) GDPR

be interpreted broadly (cf. on the comparable legal situation under Directive 95/46 the judgement of the ECJ of 6 November 2003, C 101/01, Rs Lindqvist

of Article 6(1)(c) instead of Article 6(1)(f) as the District Court held. The Court of Appeal ruled that the District Court's discussion of Article 6(1)(c)

on the repeal of Directive 95/46/EC (General Protection Regulation data) SL EU L119. 3 The General Data Protection Regulation in Article 4, Paragraph 1,

respectively. 46 In the fourth place, the referring court infers from Article 4(1)(b) and (c), Article 8(1) and (2) and Article 10 of Directive 2016/680 that

5.1.c) of the GDPR pursuant to Article 95, §1, 3° of the LCA; - pursuant to Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the LCA, to order the

of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC SLEU L119 (hereinafter referred to as the "General Regulation")

than Directive 95/46, because the GDPR's right to object does not limit the grounds on which data subjects may request erasure pursuant to Article 17 para

from the ePrivacy Directive implementation and specify and supplement the GDPR. § 3(1) mentioned in this case corresponds to Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy

such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), hereinafter GDPR; Having regard to the law of 3 December 2017 establishing

personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC Article 2 (1) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 (hereinafter: the General

specific categories of information in Article 8 (1) and (5) of Directive 95/46 or in Article 9 (1), Article 10 (1) and Article 10 of Regulation 2016/679, the

Since these operations are explicitly and unconditional in Article 2(b) of Directive 95/46, must be regarded as treatment within the meaning of that provision