Search results

leeway exists only in cases of Article 64(2) GDPR but not the context of Article 70(2) GDPR. According to Article 70(3) GDPR, the EDPB is obligated to “forward

access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), erasure (Article 17 GDPR), restriction (Article 18 GDPR), notification (Article 19 GDPR) or data

proposed amendments to the GDPR (pursuant to Article 70(1)(b) GDPR). Although not explicitly mentioned in Article 69(2) GDPR, the requirement that the Board

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 public

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 SA

1049/2001. More specific provisions include Articles 64(5)(b), 65(5), 70(3) and 70(4) GDPR, which regulate the publication of opinions and resolutions of the

decisions pursuant to Article 65 GDPR (Article 70(1)(t) GDPR). Article 68 GDPR is the first of nine Articles (Articles 68-76 GDPR) governing the EDPB set

lead SA (“LSA”) (Article 65(1)(b) GDPR), and where a SA is not following an opinion of the EDPB (Article 6(1)(c) GDPR). Article 65(1)(a) GDPR addresses the

reliance on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR or at least exercise the right to object under Article 21 GDPR. If the legal basis is Article 6(1)(f) GDPR (i.e. 'legitimate

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)

such as profiling (see also Article 4(4) GDPR); Restriction (marking for limited further processing, see also Article 4(3) GDPR), such as deactivation of

consent under Article 6(4) GDPR and further processing for a compatible purpose under Article 6(4) GDPR. See the commentary on Article 6(4) GDPR for details

dispute resolution under Article 65(3)(1) GDPR and for consistency decisions in the urgency procedure under Article 66(4) GDPR is necessary, as these are

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 and

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

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

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

under the GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 94 GDPR Kühling, Raab, in Kühling, Buchner, GVO BDSG, Article 94 GDPR, margin numbers

protected by Article 96 GDPR if it is found to be incompatible with other GDPR provisions. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 96 GDPR It follows

in force for more than 4 years after the GDPR’s entrance into force. Responding to requests regarding the applicability of the GDPR in Slovenia, the IP issued

recitals for Article 97 GDPR. Article 97 GDPR imposes a "comprehensive reporting obligation" upon the Commission. The first paragraph of Article 97 GDPR sets out

evaluating the effectiveness of security measures (Article 32(1)(d) GDPR). According to Article 4(5) GDPR, "pseudonymisation" means the processing of personal

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 and

Marsch, DS-GVO/BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin numbers 4 and 5 (Nomos 2022). Ziebarth, in Sydow, Marsch, DS-GVO/BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin number 8 (Nomos

mechanism referred to in Article 63 GDPR (Article 28(8) GDPR). The Commission has made use of its power under Article 28(7) GDPR and published standard contractual

with the support of the EDPB in accordance with Article 70(1)(b) GDPR. According to Article 45(5) GDPR, the continued monitoring referred to in paragraph

Category:Article 67 GDPR See EDPB, State of Play - IMI for GDPR purposes, 27 June 2018 (available here). See EDPB, 2019 Annual Report, Section 4.3.1 (available

directly to children. As such, Article 8 GDPR stipulates additional requirements for consent by children. Article 8 GDPR applies only if the processing

(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)

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 7 (C

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

subject to the GDPR or, in cases where they are not established in the EU, act within the material and territorial scope of the GDPR. Article 48 GDPR refers to

Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 75 GDPR, p. 1105 (Oxford University Press 2020). Dix, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 75 GDPR, margin number 6

accordance with Article 98'. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 98 GDPR The CJEU has yet to rule on Article 98 GDPR. Nonetheless, the

from Article 6(1) GDPR and comply with the principles enshrined in Article 5 GDPR. Additionally, the processing will still be subject to other GDPR provisions

disclosed to per Article 4(9) GDPR. Article 19 does not establish any specific time requirement for notification. However, since the purpose of Article 19 is to

burdens. This reading of Article 31 GDPR is supported by the language of Article 83(4)(a) GDPR which categorises Article 31 GDPR as an 'obligation' of the

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

62(7) GDPR, the reference to the EDPB is mandatory. The authority addressed under Article 66(1)-(2) GDPR is the CSA within the meaning of Article 4(22) GDPR

unlike delegated acts made under Article 92 GDPR. Article 93(2) GDPR explicitly provides for the application of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011

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

Recital 167 GDPR and Article 291 TFEU, the aim of implementing acts is to “ensure uniform conditions for implementing” the GDPR. In its GDPR Certification

situation, Article 95 GDPR will not be relevant, and the GDPR applies as normal. Notably, Recital 173 GDPR, which relates to Article 95 GDPR, omits reference

deals with processing within the scope of the GDPR. Part 2 deals with processing outside of the scope of the GDPR. Part 3 deals with processing by competent

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 to transfers of personal

Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 25 GDPR, p. 577 (Oxford University Press 2020). EDPB, 'Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection

conduct under Article 83 GDPR should be excluded from penalties issued under Article 84 GDPR is debated. Whilst the wording of the GDPR is simply unclear

please refer to Article 19 GDPR. If the controller declines to rectify the data, they must provide reasons for their decision (Article 12(4) GDPR). The data

categories of data established in Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, Article 9(2)(c) GDPR, Article 9(2)(g) GDPR and Article 9(2)(i) GDPR directly correlate with a specific

simple majority principle under Article 72(1) GDPR would have applied regardless of Article 73(1) GDPR. In addition, the GDPR explicitly legislates for a simple

objections pursuant to Article 92(5) GDPR. Article 92(5) GDPR imposes a further condition for the delegation of power, in line with Article 290(2)(b) TFEU. A

64(2) GDPR). The remaining paragraphs of Article 64(3)-(8) GDPR lay down substantive rules and a detailed procedure for the EDPB’s opinions. Article 64(1) GDPR

meaning of Article 4(7) and (8) GDPR can be liable for compensation. A claim for damages first requires an infringement of the GDPR. Article 82 GDPR does not

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 38 GDPR, p. 707 (Oxford University Press 2020). Bergt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 38 GDPR, margin number

with the 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

Member State in relation to damage referred to in Article 62(4) GDPR. According to Article 62(7) GDPR, if the lead SA does not invite the SA to take part

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

from any of the GDPR’s protections. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 39 GDPR Just as Article 38 GDPR, Article 39 GDPR also shows similarities

right to data protection. Article 51 GDPR is closely connected to Article 4(21) (definition of SA), Article 52 (independence), Article 53 (General conditions

Category:Article 11 GDPR Georgieva, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 11 GDPR, p. 395

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

compliance with the GDPR under Article 58(2)(d) GDPR or even ban it under Article 58(2)(f) GDPR. Therefore, complaints under Article 77 GDPR should extend to

accordance with Article 58(1) GDPR. Article 90 GDPR was drafted with a view to regulate potential conflicts between the application of the GDPR on the one hand

requirements of data minimization (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR) and storage limitation (Article 5(1)(e) GDPR). Under Article 30(1)(f) GDPR, where possible, the controller

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

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

difference between Article 42(1) GDPR and Article 42(2) GDPR is that in the former, the applicant for certification is subject to the GDPR, while in latter

meaning Recital 86 GDPR). However, Article 34 GDPR does not provide a specific deadline of 72 hours as is the case in Article 33 GDPR. Instead, timelines

other DPAs concerned. The BCR Lead the submits, following Article 64(1) GDPR and Article 64(4) GDPR, a draft decision to the EDPB. The EDPB, in turn, issues

clear from the wording of Article 41(1) GDPR. Article 41(1) GDPR does not define accreditation. Nonetheless, Article 41(2) GDPR provides a criterion against

complaint under Article 77(1) GDPR on behalf of the data subject and to represent the them before all supervisory authorities (“SA”) (Article 4(21) GDPR). Secondly

further discussed, in Article 4(1) GDPR. Any information that relates to an identified or identifiable natural person falls under the GDPR, this also includes

listed in Article 83(4), (5) and (6) GDPR. This specifically refers to violations of Articles 8, 11, 25 to 39, 41(4), 42, 43 of the GDPR (paragraph 4), Articles

on Article 36(4), it is still disputed whether the outcome of the procedure rather resembles that of Article 58(3)(a) GDPR or Article 58(3)(b) GDPR. See

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 53 GDPR, p. 888 (Oxford University Press 2020). Boehm, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 54 GDPR, margin numbers

Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020). Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article

controller (as defined under Article 4(7) GDPR) and a processor (as defined under Article 4(8) GDPR). As noted above, Article 79 GDPR imposes a two-stage cumulative

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

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) GDPR)

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

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)

explicit wording of Article 81 GDPR does not limit its application to proceedings instigated either under Article 78 GDPR or Article 79 GDPR. Secondly, the

and interpretation as in Article 22(3) GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 22 GDPR Article 20 of GDPR proposal, COM(2012) 11 final

which would be competent under Article 55(1) GDPR, as provided in Article 56 GDPR in connection with Article 60 GDPR. For more information see commentary

adequacy decision pursuant to Article 45 GDPR shall be used, when it exists; second, appropriate safeguards under Article 46 GDPR, such as binding corporate

that purpose. Article 89(4) GDPR makes it clear that the derogations to the GDPR are only available for processing specified in Article 89 GDPR, and not for

or infringes the GDPR or any other applicable laws, including national ones. See commentary under Article 77 GDPR. Article 78(1) GDPR establishes both

a "filing system" within the meaning of Article 4(6) GDPR. See also Article 2(1) GDPR on the scope of the GDPR when it comes to non-automated filing systems

about the scope of the term 'personal data' under Article 4(1) GDPR. Non-EU citizens can rely on the GDPR as its application is generally independent of nationality

provisions such as Article 30(4) for the record of processing or Article 40(11) for the register of approved codes of conduct, Article 26 does not explicitly

into force of the GDPR. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1073. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023)

can carry out a notification in phases under Article 33(4) GDPR (see below). Under Article 33(3)(b) GDPR, the supervisory authority must be given the contact

categories of data under Article 9 GDPR or data relating to criminal convictions and offences under Article 10 GDPR. Article 37(2) GDPR allows for the designation

in Category:Article 3 GDPR EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November 2019 (Version 2.1), p. 4 (available here)

provided for in Article 52(3) GDPR and Articles 53(3) and 53(4) GDPR. For more information on SA members and staff, please refer to Article 52(2) GDPR (SA members)

are dealt with in Article 12(6) GDPR. It is unclear why Article 12(2) GDPR refers to Articles 15 to 22 GDPR, while Article 11(2) GDPR only refers to Articles

requirements. Although Article 40(5) GDPR mentions that the competent DPA will be determined through the application of Article 55 GDPR, the GDPR does not provide

GDPR are Article 4(7) GDPR (definition of controller), Article 4(8) GDPR (definition of processor), Article 4(16) GDPR (definition of main establishment)

possible "legitimate interest" under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Equally to Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR require that Union or Member State

refusal to take action on a data subject’s request (Article 12(4)). The first sentence of Article 20(3) GDPR clarifies that the exercise of the right to data

incompatible with the office. Article 52(4) GDPR and Article 52(6) GDPR establish the framework for SAs financial governance. Article 52(4) GDPR stipulates that SAs

of such processing (see Article 5(1)(b) GDPR), the requirement to have a legitimate basis laid down by law (see Article 6(1) GDPR), the right to access and

the fine, the criteria specified in the same article 83. 111. Article 83 of the GDPR, as referred to in Article 20, paragraph III, of the Data Protection

exemption is based on Article 85(2) GDPR. According to Article 26(3) of the 2018 Act, certain GDPR provisions (listed in Article 26(9)) will not apply

objected to its processing pursuant to Article 21(1) of the GDPR (Article 17(1)(a), (c)(1) and (d) of the GDPR). A request for erasure would therefore

context of Articles 40 and 41 GDPR, in particular from Article 40 Paragraph 4 in conjunction with Article 41 Paragraph 2 lit. c) GDPR, namely further that a monitoring

administrative fine for the infringement of Article 6(1) or Article 6(1)(b) GDPR meet the requirements of Article 4(24) GDPR. 504. The EDPB decides that the relevant

personal data concerning him". In this sense, Article 6.1 of the RGPD establishes that "in accordance with Article 4.11 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, consent

asked whether the joint control of data in accordance with Article 4(7) and Article 26(1) GDPR must be interpreted 'exclusively' as involving deliberately

"accept all" button be considered a breach of GDPR Article 4(11) and Article 7, read in conjunction with GDPR Article 5(3) -Privacy while the data controller

the national law and thus falls under one of the legal grounds in Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. The President of the Personal Data Protection Office (UODO) stated

under the GDPR and needs to establish a valid legal basis to process personal data. Unsolicited political communication is regulated with Article 11 L. 3471/2006

erased and thus also violates Article 17.1(c) AVG. 3.2. With regard to the infringement of Article 6.1 and Article 21.4 of the AVG 29. In its statement

Protection Officer (DPO) under Section 4 of Chapter 4 of the GDPR (see in particular Article 37 GDPR to Article 39 GDPR). One of these audit proceedings concerned

according to the introduction of Article 4, this only applies "where this Directive does not provide otherwise". Under Article 8(6) of the Directive, for distance

monitor 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

basis under Article 6 GDPR to collect and process vehicle registration numbers. The legal basis is a statutory obligation prescribed by Article 229 of the

the following: Article 66 GDPR gives the possibility for a procedure of urgency and from this article (and Article 66 and Article 62 GDPR), the European

other two conditions of Article 6 (1) (f) of the GDPR are not met. (26) The second condition of Article 6 (1) (f) of the GDPR is that the processing of

under 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

website controller qualifies as controller (Article 4(7) GDPR) and Google LLC as processor (Article 4(8) GDPR) for data processing in connection with Google

relation to contraventions of the UK-GDPR, section 168 DPA 2018 provides that "non-material damage" in Article 82 GDPR includes distress. In relation to breaches

defendant within the meaning of Article 4 of the GDPR. The defendant is therefore a controller within the meaning of Art. 4 No. 7 GDPR. b. 44 The Senate is convinced

communication service. Therefore, TikTok had to obtain valid consent (Article 4(11) GDPR) from users before using the identifiers. The DPA stated that it should

their employees. The DPA found a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Following a visit to the premises of two public

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 subject

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

provided for in Article 56(1), read in conjunction with Article 56(2), read in conjunction with Article 56(3), read in conjunction with Article 56(4), read in

invoked the excessiveness of the request under Article 12(5) GDPR alleging that the data subject uses Article 15 GDPR only to verify the validity of the premium

that a controller is allowed to reject a request to access under Article 12(5)(b) GDPR as "excessive" if the request's sole purpose is to verify the validity

that the article’s publication was in violation of Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, when read in line with Article 85 GDPR. Article 5(1)(c) outlines

the basis of Article 58, paragraph 2, point b) GDPR and Article 100, §1, 5 ° WOG to be reprimanded for the infringement of Article 25 (1) GDPR; b. on the

protection within the meaning of Article 45 of the GDPR and without appropriate safeguards within the meaning of Article 46 of the GDPR. Furthermore, the plaintiff

by the alleged violation of Article 32 of the RGPD, Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, Article 25 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD. FOURTH: On

authentication via a third service provider cannot constitute a breach of Article 6 of the GDPR when it implies that the personal data of the data subjects are not

applied Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, according to which the data subject could have voluntarily disclosed their health data defined in Article 4(15) GDPR to the

way of a finding under article 15 of the GDR instead of the provisions of article 15 of the GDR. 36, § 4 and § 5 as well as Article 38, § 1 of the Law of

reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA also ordered the controller to erase the

had fulfilled its obligation to provide information pursuant to Article 12(3) and Article 4(7) of the Basic Law (Voriger SuchbegriffDSGVONächster Suchbegriff)

[The equivalent GDPR Article to Article 48(3)(a) EU GDPR is Article 46(3)(a) GDPR, and Article 50(1)(d) EU GDPR is Article 49(1)(d) GDPR.] Share blogs or

power conferred by Article 58(2)(d) and (f) and Article 83(3) and (5) GDPR, imposed to Fastweb multiple corrective measures and a fine of € 4.501.868. Share

carried out in compliance with the GDPR. Therefore, the DPA determined that the controller violated Article 24(1) GDPR by using this safety mechanism. The

accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR. Ten DPAs (AT, DE, FI, FR, IT, NL, NO, PL, PT, SE) raised objections, in accordance with Article 60(4) GDPR, to the Draft

year 2005-2006, 29 708, no. 19 (p. 523) Article 4:32 The obligation from this article is taken over from Article 52 of the Wfd. Under Section 14(2) of the

and 13 GDPR? Is the information provided to data subjects throughout the subscription process in compliance with the provisions of Article 13 GDPR? Does

defendant pursuant to Article 100(1) °WOG, since that first defendant does not appear to be a data controller in accordance with Article 4(7) AVG for the facts

case fell under the household exception found in Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. According to this provision, the GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data

Regulation) Article 1, paragraph 2, Article 5, Article 6, paragraph 1, subparagraph f, Article 17(1)(a), (c) and (d), Article 17(3)(a), Article 21(1) Judgments

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

sense of Article 4(1) GDPR. Moreover, OLG Celle also held that a singular access request can never be excessive for the purposes of Article 12(5) GDPR as the

accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR. Ten DPAs (AT, DE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, NL, NO, SE) raised objections, in accordance with Article 60(4) GDPR, to the Draft

the ePrivacy Directive and Articles 6(1)(a) and 7 GDPR, in the lights of Article 4(11) and Recital 32 GDPR. Following this report, the GBA issued a decision

was no reason for erasure under Article 17 GDPR as the processing was still necessary and lawful under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. In June 2020, the data subject

security measures: Article 32 of the GDPR and Article 3 of Law no. 506/2004. The latter is the transposition of the E-Privacy Directive's Article 4. (2) This is

the inspected with section 4 of chapter 4 of the GDPR. 3. […] the inspectorate [is active in the field of transport] […]. 4. The controlled has approximately

23Investigation report, page 34, point 4.4.8.1. 24Investigation report, page 34, point 4.4.8.2.1.1 25Investigation report, page 34, point 4.4.8.2.2.1 _______________

processing of personal data within the meaning of Article 4 GDPR and is it justified on the basis of Article 6 GDPR? Can the controller raise the argument that

foundation was responsible for violating Article 33 GDPR, and issued it with a warning pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. The AEPD did not find the former Secretary

readers (the article in question is still posted on the internet at the following link: http://politis.com.cy/article/astinomiko-kapsoni-se70chroni-tk)

provisions of Article 12, paragraphs 1, 2 and 4. In other cases where registered complaints applies to Article 12, paragraph 1. 9 Article 12 (4) of the Privacy

After considering the objections in light of Article 4(24) GDPR and the factors outlined in Article 83(2) GDPR the EDPB instructed the DPC to impose an administrative

Art. 4 No. 1 GDPR, is processed and stored here by the defendant as the person responsible in accordance with Art. 4 No. 7 GDPR. According to Art. 4 No.

SANTE) has submitted to the EDPB a request for consultation under Art. 70 GDPR concerning a document on “Questions and Answers on the interplay between

the data subject's consent in Article 4(11), and the basic principle of legality, reasonableness and transparency in Article 5(1)(a). Furthermore, Datatilsynet

basis under Article 6(1) GDPR. In light of this, the DPA issued a fine of €70,000 to másLUZ Energía (SIE) by virtue of Article 83(5) GDPR for unlawful

available or consulting" of "data relating to health" (Article 2-septies, paragraph 8; Article 2-ter, paragraph 4, letter b) of the Code). The Regulation also provides

83(4) and (5) GDPR) 7.36 The infringement of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR falls within Article 83(5)(a) GDPR, whereas Article 32 falls within Article 83(4)(a)

3.2.3. To an objection by the BF according to Art 21 GDPR According to Article 21 Paragraph 1 GDPR, every person concerned has the right to object at any

protection, the DSGVO had come into force during the proceedings. Pursuant to Article 69 (4) of the DSG, proceedings pending before the ordinary courts under the

the performance of a contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR) and for legitimate interest (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR). Article 6(1)(b) GDPR In its original draft decision

The Court finds this process compliant with Article 15 GDPR, on the right of access, and Article 23 GDPR on restrictions to the rights of data subject

right to erasure (“right to be forgotten”) of Article 17 GDPR and Article 19 of Regulation 2018/1725. Under GDPR, such prolonged and unrestricted data retention

with NIF A65445033, for a violation of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, a fine of 70,000 euros (seventy thousand euro). Likewise

Court found that customers’ order data is health data and fall within Article 9(1) GDPR. Amazon does not collect health data stricto sensu but it can draw

with the principles of article 5 par. 1 GDPR. It is no coincidence that the GDPR includes accountability (see Article 5 para. 2 GDPR) in the regulation of

DE SA’s objection on Article 33(3) GDPR fails to meet the requirements set out in Article 4(24) GDPR Infringement of Article 34 GDPR on the communication

future incoming communications" (note cit., p. 6). 1.4. On 10 September 2019, pursuant to Article 166, paragraph 5, of the Code, the Office notified the

Privacy Ordinance, Article 4, No. 2 and the Act on processing of personal data of 15 June 2018 no. 38 (Personal Data Act) § 1. Article 6 (1) of the Privacy

other things, article 4 paragraph 1 SUWI and the ZBO register of the Dutch central government. See article 2 paragraph 2 SUWI and article 4 paragraph 1 SUWI

accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR. Ten DPAs (AT, DE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, NL, NO, SE) raised objections, in accordance with Article 60(4) GDPR, to the Draft

information and the protection of personal data under Article 86 GDPR. However, the restriction under its Article 5(1) of the Polish Act on Access to Public Information

of him or her, cf. 2. tölul. Article 3 Act no. 90/2018 and point 1. Article 4 of the Regulation. According to para. Article 4 Act no. 90/2018, the Act and

publication of the press release of 17 June 2020 infringed Article 54(2) GDPR and Article 48(1) and Article 64(3) WOG. This press release described that the DPA

even pseudonymised data (Art. 4 Para. 5 GDPR) from the term personal data are recorded in accordance with Art. 4 Para. 1 GDPR. It is undeniable that the MB

( *** POSITION 1) for an infraction of Article 6.1.f) of the GDPR, in accordance with Article 83.5 of the GDPR ”. In the face of it, no allegations have

basis in line with Article 13(1)(d) GDPR. The DPA stated that it would impose a fine on the controller, pursuant to Article 58(2)(i) GDPR, if latter does

necessary and proportional. Hence, it appeared the Court referred to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Moreover, it must also be clear, for both the employee and the client

data subject argued that Article 5,13 and 14 LED (the roughly equivalent GDPR articles would be Article 5(1)(e), 13 and 15 GDPR) do not permit the police

under Article 77(1) GDPR and subsequently the right of judicial remedy against the supervisory authority under Article 78(1) GDPR. Article 79 (1) GDPR provides

default (Art. 25 GDPR), integrity and confidentiality (Art. 5.1.f GDPR), as well as security ofprocessing(Art. 32GDPR)......101 B.4.4. - Additional alleged

"lifting". (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

none of the exceptions in Article 82 of the Data Protection Act were applicable, and Apple had to obtain consent (Article 4(11) GDPR) before using the identifiers

the definitions of the legal concepts that the RGPD indicates in article 4: Article 4 GDPR. Definitions For the purposes of this Regulation, the following

publication of the judgment breach the GDPR? The AEPD held that the respondent’s actions violated the GDPR Article 5(1)(a) requirement that processing must

of public space respect Article 5 (1) (c) GDPR? The AEPD held that the installation of a video surveillance system under Article 22 LOPDGDD must always

down in Article 28 of the GDPR. The Commission wonders about such a qualification in the light of the definition of a subcontractor given in Article 4.8 of

accountability pursuant to Article 5(2) UK GDPR because it failed to demonstrate compliance with Article 5(1)(a) and (c) UK GDPR principles of lawfulness

6(2) and 6(3) GDPR allow the Member States to introduce more specific provisions to adapt the application of the rules of Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, the Hessian

2019, GDPR Art. 37, para. 1; Döpfler , EU-GDPR and BDSG, 2nd edition 2020, GDPR Art. 37, marginal 1; Paal / Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, 2nd ed. 2018, GDPR Art.

comprehensible character, within the meaning of Article 12 of the GDPR, of the information provided for in Article 13 of the Regulation must be assessed. The

the type of data) are: Article 9(2)(h) GDPR (necessary for the purposes of preventive or occupational medicine); Article 9(2)(i) GDPR (for reasons of public

the data subjects, therefore breaching Article 6 GDPR, as well as Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. Thirdly, Article 30 GDPR stipulates that the controller must keep

under Article Article 82 (1) GDPR. The second defendant, as data protection officer, is not a "controller" within the meaning of Article 4(7) GDPR. Only

principles to the GDPR;
 
 (b) The effect (if any) of the remaining claims – Article 5(1)(f) GDPR (the data security principle), the Article 8 claim and

the GDPR. According to the defendant, this partner is thus not processor within the meaning of Article 4 (8) GDPR. Consequently, Article 28 (3) GDPR does

name is personal data under Article 4(1) GDPR. Additionally, the Head of the Municipality maintained that according to Article 11 of the Polish Labour Code

Compétence de la Chambre de Résolution des Litiges (Article 2 AVG ; Article 4 WOG) 55. Conformément à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, de l'AVG, le règlement s'applique

anonymized. Therefore, the DPA found a violation of Article 5(1)(a), (b), (c), and (e) and Article 12(1) GDPR. For the reasons above, the DPA imposed a fine

free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/W (GDPR), as well as article 70 sec. 1 and 2 of the Act on the Protection of Personal Data -

violated Article 6 and Article 32 GDPR. The DPA seems to consider the authentication procedure itself as "processing" and therefore Article 32 GDPR applies

information. According to Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the GDPR, the term “processing” includes any “According to Article 4, Paragraph 2, of the GDPR, the term of processing

data had taken place, meaning GDPR obligations did not apply. Are these magnetic cards personal data within Article 4(1) GDPR? If so, did the MCP infringe

several violations of the GDPR. Firstly, the USL had not documented its processing activities as required by Article 30 GDPR, despite the two years between

breach of Article 28 paragraphs 3 and 4 of the GDPR is clear. 2. On the breach of the obligation to ensure data security 49. According to Article 32 of the

requirements of Article 6(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7 GDPR, which cannot be superseded by relying on Article 6(1)(b) GDPR? Is Article 5(1)(c) GDPR (data

violated Article 5(1)(e) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant

meaning of article 4.19 of the GDPR – (article 13.1. c) of the GDPR) and does not mention the data retention periods personal data processed (article 13.2.

fulfill the requirements of Article 28 GDPR. The DPA concluded that the controller failed to comply with Article 28(1)(3) and (9) GDPR by not concluding a written

Finnish DPA found a retail chain to have breached Article 5(1)(e) GDPR, Article 25(1) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR for its lengthy storage of purchase behaviour

employer violated their Article 15 GDPR obligations as a data controller. The plaintiff requested information under Article 15 GDPR from its former employer

and the right to freedom of information. The court also refers to Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, stressing that this provision does not in itself authorise data

information", Article 15(1)(g) GDPR. Furthermore, the controller had violated Article 21(4) GDPR by not providing the information listed in Article 14 GDPR in its

controller for the purposes of Article 4(7) GDPR, and Company A was the processor for the purposes of Article 4(8) GDPR. The DPA found that both Companies

account, inter alia, the criteria referred to in Article 6(4)(a) to (e) of the DPO (Article 6(4) DPO). Article 6 (4) of the DPA therefore permits further processing

12(5)(1) GDPR as an independent claim. The broad concept of personal data underlying the GDPR (Article 4(1) GDPR), the wording and purpose of Article 15(3)(1)

extremes. 11.4 In addition, processing of personal data is only lawful where it is demonstrated to have a ‘legal basis’. Article 6 of the GDPR sets out what

violation of article 32, paragraph 1, GDPR and article 13, paragraph 1, sub, GDPR BZ should end these violations as soon as possible. article58, paragraph2

violation of the general right of personality under Article 1.1, Article 2.1 of the Basic Law (Article 7, Article 8 of the Basic Law) was to be taken into account

("the GDPR"): regulation 8(2) of the Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Communications (Amendments etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. Article 4( 11)

AEPD held that the telecoms company 's actions were a breach of Article 6(1) GDPR. Article 6(1) does not apply here because they failed to prove that they

in line with the principle of lawfulness in Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, as none of the conditions of Article 6 GDPR were satisfied. The data disclosed in the land

requests for information according to Article 15(1) GDPR. The ‘Business secrecy’ exception only applied to Article 15(4) GDPR, where a data subject would request

without references to names. Moreover, (2) it included health data (Article 4(15) GDPR) as the newsletters were send to patients of the respected medical

force: "According to Article 16 sentence 1 GDPR, every data subject has the right to request the controller (see Article 4(7) GDPR) to correct incorrect

purpose constituted a breach of Article 5(1)(e) GDPR. Secondly, the CNIL indicated that the controller breached Article 13 GDPR by failing to include the right

obtained from them, as required under Article 14(1)(a) AVG and Article 14(2)(c)(e) and point (f) AVG; c. article 12 j° article 14 AVG, in view of the defendant

foreseen in Article 6(3) GDPR and its counterpart of the national law, Article 8 of Ley Orgánica 3/2018. On the other hand, Article 86 of the GDPR foresees

disregarded the provisions of Article 5-1 e) of the GDPR. C. On the breach of the obligation to inform people 65. Article 13 of the GDPR requires the data controller

inappropriate under Article 24 and 32 GDPR. In the context of damages, a combined reading of Article 5, 24, 32 and Recital 74 GDPR, evidenced to the court

found no violation of Article 5(1)(c)(e) GDPR and a prevailing legitimate interest of the defendant according to Article 6(f) GDPR. It must be noted that

conformity with the data subject’s rights of information under Article 13 GDPR and Article 14 GDPR, the hospital should firstly make clear what the legal basis

therefore of the opinion that no breach of Article 5.2 of the GDPR, Article 24.1 of the GDPR and Article 33 of the GDPR can be established. - As regards the

of the Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 a) of the GDPR, the sanction that would correspond would be a fine for an amount of 70,000 euros

data breach (Article 32 GDPR). Does the plaintiff have a right to compensation according to Article 82(1) GDPR and does Article 82(3) GDPR stipulate a reversal

is only authorised where it is freely given, specific and informed (Article 4(11) GDPR). As there is no evidence of individuals consenting to third party

infringement of Article 5.1 b) in conjunction with Article 6.4. AVG, on article 5.1 a) in conjunction with article 6.1. AVG and on article 5.1 c) GDPR has been

consent by the data subject in accordance with Article 6 juncto Article 7 of the Regulation? 4° Must Article 17.2 of the General Data Protection Regulation

the RGPD must be observed. In turn, pursuant to article 83. 2.k GDPR, the circumstances described in article 76 LOPDGDD may also be taken into consideration

Failure to ensure data protection by default (Article 25(2) GDPR) The DPA also found a violation of Article 25(2) GDPR regarding the controllers “X” icon at the

personal data, within the meaning of Article 4(2) of Regulation. Louis Companies is responsible for processing (Article 4(7) of the Regulation). Data subjects