Search results

instructive in the interpretation of Recital 23 GDPR. Contrary to the usual definition of good and services, the GDPR clarifies that processing is covered

BDSG, Article 6 GDPR, margin number 20 (C.H. Beck 2020). Recital 32 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 32 sentence 2 GDPR. Recital 32 sentence 3 GDPR. CJEU, C‑673/17

GDPR. Recital 71 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 71 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 28 sentence 1 GDPR, such as Hansen, in Simitis, Hornung, Spieker, Datenschutzrecht

Knyrim, DatKomm, Article 32 GDPR, margin numbers 23 (Manz 2022). Pollirer, in Knyrim, DatKomm, Article 32 GDPR, margin numbers 23 (Manz 2022). Pollirer, in

in relation to the GDPR - usually in the form of a Restriction under Article 23 GDPR - these other rights exist in parallel to the GDPR. This means a data

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 legal

listed in Articles 13 GDPR. In certain cases, Article 23 GDPR may be used by Member States to exempt certain duties under Article 13 GDPR in certain situations

(Article 12(1) GDPR), facilitate the data subject (Article 12(2) GDPR), respond and communicate the measures taken (Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR), the principle

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 on the

and purposes outlined in Article 23(1)(a) to (j) GDPR (e.g. national and public security) as well as Recital 73 GDPR (e.g. protection of human life). In

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 Articles

(Article 12 GDPR), information (Articles 13 and 14 GDPR), access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), erasure (Article 17 GDPR), restriction

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 32 GDPR, p. 636 (Oxford University Press 2020). Jandt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 32 GDPR, margin number

(Article 4(23) GDPR), several supervisory authorities (SA) could be competent according to Article 55 GDPR. For this reason, Article 56(1) GDPR establishes

Article 83(8) GDPR corresponds in this respect to Recital 148 sentence 4 GDPR. Nemitz, in Ehmann,Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 83 GDPR, margin

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

processing of personal data of deceased persons. Article 2 GDPR sets out the material scope of the GDPR. Paragraph 1 clarifies that the Regulation applies to

of the most innovative elements in the GDPR related to the accountability principle (see Articles 5(2) and 24 GDPR). This provision regulates the cases in

the 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

Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 55 GDPR, page 909 (Oxford University Press 2020). See Recital 20 GDPR and CJEU, in C-245/20 - Autoriteit

Regulation (GDPR), Article 7 GDPR, p. 350 (Oxford University Press 2020). Heckmann, Paschke, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 7 GDPR, margin

since, under Article 28(1) GDPR, a controller shall only use processors providing the same standards under Article 25 GDPR. Manufacturers or producers

Article 82 GDPR – like almost all provisions of the GDPR – is directly applicable in all Member States without any act of implementation. Article 82 GDPR leaves

consideration when the GDPR was drafted. There is consequently no need to 'balance' the GDPR against other rights for a second time, as the GDPR is already the

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 is also

purpose (Article 52(4)(5)(6) GDPR). Elements of SAs' complete independence are also addressed in Article 53 GDPR and Article 54 GDPR. The CJEU in the Case of

natural persons”. The GDPR does not define what constitutes a “risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons”. Recital 75 GDPR only outlines potential

prevention (Article 23(1)(a-j) GDPR) allow for far fewer GDPR restrictions than those granted by freedom of expression. Article 85(2) GDPR poses one condition

Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 27 GDPR, pp. 595-596 (Oxford University Press 2020). Recital 80 sentence 5 GDPR. Ziebarth, in Sydow,

interpreted Recital 144 GDPR to have limited the scope of Article 81 GDPR, as applying only to proceedings instigated under Article 78 GDPR. The first sentence

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

to Article 23(1)(e) GDPR, which sets out strict requirements for the Union or Member State's law restricting GDPR rights, Article 18(2) GDPR does not make

22(2)(c) GDPR. Finally, decisions based on explicit consent are also subjected to the safeguards laid down in Article 22(3) GDPR. Article 22(3) GDPR lays down

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

personal data as well (see Recital 163 GDPR). Tosoni in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 98 GDPR, p. 1315 (Oxford University

out data relating to deceased persons, this Recital confirms Recital 27 GDPR, according to which the GDPR “does not apply to the personal data of deceased

You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 36 GDPR Recital 89 GDPR. Article 36 GDPR must therefore be read as one   element within a wider framework

Article 79 GDPR, margin number 14 (rdb.at 2018). Jahnel in Jahnel, DSGVO, Article 79 GDPR, margin number 29 (Jan Sramek 2021). See Recital 141 GDPR. Moos,

in other parts of the GDPR. To begin with, Recital 141 GDPR clarifies that an SA must “act on a complaint”. Article 57(1)(f) GDPR, in turns, establishes

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

catalogue of penalties in Article 83 GDPR. National legislators may add provisions to fill these gaps. Under Recital 152 GDPR, these provisions may either be

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

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

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

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 cross-border

(Articles 55-59 GDPR). The GDPR provides for exceptions from provisions entailed in Chapter VI (independent supervisory authorities). Article 85(2) GDPR mandates

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

57 GDPR should be deemed inadmissible for the purposes of Article 31 GDPR. Article 31 GDPR can be read as a supporting provision to Article 58 GDPR. In

88(1) GDPR) and a conditional function (Article 88(2) GDPR). While Article 88(2) GDPR determines the scope of the opening clause, Article 88(1) GDPR establishes

Articles 13 or 14 GDPR. This can be drawn from the final sentence of Article 11(1) GDPR. It must be assessed with the utmost attention whether GDPR provisions

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

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 concrete

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 is

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 its

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

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, and

Category:Article 86 GDPR At para. 120 Kranenborg, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 86 GDPR, p. 1216 (Oxford University

Article 72 GDPR regulates the Board's voting procedure. Generally, the GDPR grants the EDPB a high degree of autonomy. In particular, Article 72(2) GDPR entitles

the scope of the LED from the scope of the GDPR. Article 10 GDPR is intended to extend the protection of the GDPR to the processing of certain criminal data

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

large-scale, or involve processing of data under Article 9 GDPR or Article 10 GDPR. Recital 97 GDPR clarifies that the core activities of a controller are

provisions of the GDPR. This decision refers to the Administrative cooperation between SAs (covering cooperation under Articles 56, 60, 61 and 62 GDPR) and the

true also under Article 91 GDPR”. See, Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University

application of Article 65(1)(a) GDPR, (13 April 2021), margin number 57 (available here). See also Recital 143 GDPR. See Article 78(2) GDPR. Hijmans, in Kuner et

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. In these cases

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

authority. Article 61(1) GDPR regulates how independent authorities are to cooperate to enable the uniform application of the GDPR. Supervisory authorities

provisions of the GDPR require the controller to keep track of individual recipients. For example, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR and Article 19 GDPR require the disclosure

outlined under other Articles of the GDPR, namely in Articles 51, 52 and 53 GDPR. The second objective, under Article 54(2) GDPR, seeks to regulate the confidentiality

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, across

to Article 6 GDPR; the principles of data processing pursuant to Article 5 GDPR; the data subjects’ rights pursuant to Articles 12-23 GDPR; the obligation

sors_en Recital 121 GDPR. Hijmans, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 53 GDPR, p. 888

provisions under Article 75(3) GDPR. The employees of the Board's secretariat only report to the Chair (Recital 140 GDPR). In this respect, they are therefore

differences between portability and access under Article 15(3) GDPR. According to Recital 68, the data should be available in an "interoperable format"

5(1)(d) GDPR gives the controller some leeway to continue processing inaccurate data - see more details under Article 5(1)(d) GDPR. Article 16 GDPR, titled

60, 63, 64 and 65 GDPR) immediately adopt provisional measures intended to produce legal effects on its own territory. Article 66 GDPR creates strict conditions

exclusion of Article 82 GDPR is confirmed by the last sentence of Recital 142 GDPR. In addition, Article 80(2) GDPR does not permit Member States to allow NPOs

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 forth

It 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

Category:Article 45 GDPR Kuner, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 45 GDPR, p. 774 (Oxford

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

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

systems of the Member States. → See Article 23 GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 19 GDPR. The obligation to notify under Article

Article 62 GDPR, margin number 11 (Beck 2018, 2nd edition). Riccio, Scorza, Belisario, GDPR e normativa privacy – Commentario, Article 62 GDPR (Wolters Kluwer

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

of the GDPR enforcement across the Member States. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 64 GDPR Caspar in Kühling, Buchner, GDPR Article

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.H. Beck

76 GDPR, margin number 1 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 76 GDPR, p

encompasses other obligations of controllers under the GDPR. EDPB: This extends to various obligations under the GDPR, including but not limited to the implementation

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

mentioned in 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

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 majority

of the European Union ("TFEU"), within the scope of the GDPR. The function of Article 92 GDPR is to lay down conditions for the delegation of power as

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

Category:Article 47 GDPR Kuner, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Update of Selected Articles, Article 68 GDPR, p. 194 (Oxford

progress. Fill in the name used for the recital if you use it so we can ensure a somewhat streamlined practice. Recital 1: The protection of natural persons

when passing the GDPR. In fact, all but one EU Member State (who has sought higher protections) have voted in favor the GDPR. The GDPR is not just consisting

undefined in the GDPR. “Expertise” is only referred to again under Article 41(2)(a) GDPR, although briefly. Additionally, Article 41(1) GDPR specifies that

per Article 45(3) GDPR, and subject to regular reporting, which Article 97(2) GDPR provides for. The third paragraph of Article 97 GDPR, obliges the Commission

enforcement of the GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 59 GDPR Selmayr, in Ehmann, Selmayr, DS-GVO Kommentar, Article 59 GDPR, margin number

data under Article 4(1) GDPR, especially because they allow to single out a data subject within the meaning of recital 26 of the GDPR. It is sufficient that

to in the first sentence of recital 63 GDPR. Neither the wording of Article 12(5) GDPR nor that of Article 15(1) and (3) GDPR condition the provision (to

NOYB, local case number 9782890. Page 22 of 23The Swedish Privacy Agency Diary number: DI-2020-11373 23(23) Date: 2023-06-30 4 Appeal reference 4.1 How

same applies to the right to erasure under Article 17 of the GDPR. Recital 63 of the GDPR also supports this view. It shows that the legislator wants to

proportionality (Article 8(1) CFR, Article 9A Greek Constitution, Recital 64 GDPR), underlined that the GDPR totally respects all fundamental rights and freedoms included

election by a parliamentary assembly is explicitly envisaged by the GDPR in Recital 121. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles here! The

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

Article 46 GDPR. In 2020, noyb lodged a complaint with the Austrian DPA alleging that the controller breached the provisions of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

to Article 83 GDPR in conjunction with Article 4 No. 7 and 8 GDPR, fines for violations of the GDPR pursuant to Article 83(4) to (6) GDPR are not only to

proportionality of the measure under Article 6(4) GDPR, in accordance with the objectives referred to in Article 23(1) GDPR. It recalled that these objectives include

Fashion ID Court: CJEU Jurisdiction: European Union Relevant Law: Article 80 GDPR Article 1 Directive 95/46 Article 1(1) Directive 2009/22/EC Article 10 Directive

regarding Articles 5(1)(b) GDPR and 5(1)(e) GDPR and held that national courts had to determine, using the factors of Article 6(4) GDPR, whether further processing

subject pursuant to Article 9 (2) (a) of the GDPR ΕΙΣ/7564/05.11.2019 and the invocation of recital 47 of the GDPR 2016/679, inter alia, informed the Authority

point (g) of GDPR and 13 par. 1 point g. 4624/2019, and to exercise respectively the powers conferred on it by the provisions of Articles 58 GDPR and 15 Law

laid down in the GDPR, so that the general conditions for claims were decisive, unless the GDPR contained special rules; even under the GDPR, only non-material

15(1)(h) of the GDPR, the right of data subjects to object under Article 21(1)(1)(2) of the GDPR and - in essence - in Article 22 of the GDPR as a general

and b) GDPR. With its reply of August 23, 2019, the defendant obviously did not fulfill the further claim according to letters c) to g). Recital 53 The

complaint in accordance with Article 78, second paragraph, of the GDPR and recital 141 of the GDPR. Has the defendant observed the reasonable period in handling

to access under Article 15 GDPR because the controller was entitled to reject the request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The court reasoned that this

situation is warranted. In this respect, Recital 137 GDPR states 65 66See Article 77 GDPR. See Recital 137 GDPR. 28that an urgent need to act in order to

justification or basis for the processing, violating Article 9 GDPR. AEPD highlighted that Recital 46 GDPR already recognizes that, in exceptional situations, such

an access request under Article 15(1) GDPR. According to Recital 63 GDPR, the right of access under Article 15 GDPR serves data subjects to be informed about

e) of the GDPR). 8.1.4. As for breaches of Articles 5.2. and 24 of the GDPR 88. Article 24.1 of the GDPR which covers Chapter IV of the GDPR devoted to

understood as made to the GDPR, in accordance with article 94 of the last. Likewise, it is apparent from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

Articles 12 and 15 GDPR regarding the right to access personal data, while it also underlined the restrictions to this right that Articles 23 GDPR and 33 Law 4624/2019

Article 32 GDPR. Retaining personal data of an applicant for a lease after another applicant has been selected also violates Article 5(1)(e) GDPR. The customer

norm addressee of Chapter V GDPR. The bB be directly responsible for BF2, which violated Art. 44 ff GDPR. Regarding The GDPR is applicable to the processing

regard on that article 2.1) GDPR read in conjunction with recital 15 of the GDPR, although an exclusion from the scope of the GDPR provides for files or a

transparency), Article 12(1), Article 7, Article 13 and Article 14 GDPR, the corresponding GDPR recitals (32, 39, 42, 47, 58, 60, 61, and 72), as well are Articles

according to Art 15 Paragraph 1 GDPR, such as the origin of the data. In accordance with Art 15 (4) GDPR and Recital 63 GDPR, the information must be restricted

of the GDPR according to Art. 99 Para. 2 GDPR as of May 25, 2018 follows from Art. 79 Para. 2 Sentence 1 GDPR in conjunction with recital 22 GDPR as well

the sanctioning regime imposed by the GDPR. And this is because the GDPR is a closed and complete system. The GDPR is a European standard directly applicable

Article 17(1)(d) GDPR since the data was unlawfully processed. The defendant claimed that its activities fall under exception in (Article 85 GDPR) read in conjunction

causality between the "GDPR breach" and the "damage". Article 82(1) GDPR requires that the damage occurs as a result of a specific GDPR breach. Although it

AB for violating Article 17 GDPR by not deleting personal data of the complainant without undue delay and Article 23 GDPR by providing incorrect information

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

1 lit. f GDPR (for the protection of the processor's legitimate interests)? Right to erasure (Art. 17 GDPR); right to object (Art. 21 GDPR)? Locations

plaintiff pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR, since there have been violations of Article 6(1)(a) GDPR and Article 34 GDPR. The defendant also breached the obligation

operations, it is necessary to fall back on article 6.1. AVG and recital 50 GDPR. Recital 50 of the GDPR states that this is a separate legal basis required for

5(1)(a) GDPR? Is the information relating to personal data processing operations easily accessible within the meaning of Articles 12 and 13 GDPR? Is the

5(1)(b) and (e), 9(2)(j), 89(1) GDPR and Section 7(1)(1) and (2)(1) GDPR. In particular, it follows from Article 9(2)(j) GDPR that the processing of data relating

the meaning of Art. 15 (1) (2) (b) GDPR in conjunction with Art 4 No. 1 GDPR. According to recital 63 p. 7 to the GDPR, the party entitled to information

as “anonymisation”. Recital 26 of the GDPR clarifies that anonymous information does not fall within the scope of the GDPR. The GDPR does not 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

(4) to (6) GDPR, the European legislator obviously had supranational antitrust law as a model. This is expressed in recital 150 of the GDPR, for example

notification system for adverse events. As emphasised in recital 76 of Regulation 2016/679 (the recitals contain a justification for the provisions of the operative

the effect that this processing was of a cross-border nature (Article 4(23)(b) GDPR). The CNIL nonetheless remained the lead supervisory authority as the

in Article 25 GDPR. Additionally, the AEPD concluded that the controller had violated Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, noting that although the GDPR does not demand

Article 32 GDPR? - Does the fact that this health data is not encrypted constitute a breach of the security obligation under Article 32 GDPR? - Does the

contact-with-brussels-airport 2 AVG, recital 53. 3Data Protection Authority, 'Strategic plan 2020-2025',page 23. Decision on the merits 47/2022 - 3/73

competence granted to the member states by Art. 23 GDPR, namely the limitation competence of Art. 23 Para. 1 e) GDPR. As far as relevant here, the AO standardizes

laid down in the GDPR, so that the general conditions for claims were decisive, unless the GDPR contained special rules; even under the GDPR, only non-material

such data. 2 Recital 3. 3 Recital 5. 3 b. the rapid technological developments which have occurred during a period of globalisation.4 As Recital (6) explains:

made without legitimizing cause of those included in article 6 of the GDPR. The GDPR applies to personal data. Said regulation defines as «data personal”

Article 34(1) GDPR as it failed to communicate the data breach to its users in an appropriate way. In this, the DPC also referred to Recital 86 GDPR which foresees

Data Protection Regulation - GDPR). The defendant has a right of refusal under Art. 12 Para. 5 Sentence 2 Letter b) GDPR to. The provision only lists the

for the year, thus violating Article 39(1)(b) GDPR regarding the DPO's duties to monitor compliance with GDPR. In view of those violations, the CNPD: imposed

28(3) GDPR. Verizon replied that the obligation to conclude a written agreement between controller and processor is not clearly stated in the GDPR. Such

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

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 by natural

personal data for such activities (recital 18 of the GDPR) and therefore, the website must operate according to the GDPR requirements. The DPA examined Orienteringsret

compliance and accountability according to Article 5(1) GDPR, Article 5(2) GDPR and Article 6(1) GDPR. Since the company had totally ignored the its compliance

view to vigorous enforcement of the rules of the GDPR. After all, as is clear from Recital 148 GDPR, the GDPR puts first and foremost that with every serious

[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

reopening of the debates. 14. On 23 November 2021, the Dispute Resolution Chamber notified the Respondent of its intention to On 23 November 2021, the Dispute

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

time, which is a violation of the GDPR. As to the claim for damages, the CoS notes that though Article 82(1) of the GDPR states that full compensation for

Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 04.05.2016, p. 1, as amended by OJ L 127, 23.05.2018, p. 2), after conducting administrative proceedings on collection

Article 16 sentence 1 GDPR is the legal basis for a request for rectification, even if the request has been submitted before the GDPR entered into force:

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

data breach should be reported to the DPA, according to article 33 of the GDPR as it is likely to cause risk to the rights and freedoms of the data subject

is subject’ (recital 45 of the preamble to the GDPR). (P. 85) (…) The basis of processing data, referred to in Article 6(1)(c) of the GDPR, is the processing

attorney, on 23/12/2022 the no. prot. G/EIS/12802/23-12-2022 memorandum. During the above hearing, but also with the no. prot. C/EIS/12802/23-12-2022 following

terms of personal data protection in violation of Articles 5, 6, 13, 23 and 32 GDPR. The employer dismissed the employee after a disciplinary proceeding

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

of the concept of personal data Article 4, 1) of the GDPR, as explained in Recital 26 of the GDPR, Opinion 4/2007 of the Decision on the merits 71/2020

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

asserted here and based on Article 82 of the GDPR, appears questionable in view of sentence 3 of recital 146 of the GDPR. In the case in dispute, however, no damage

Article 82 (1) and (2) GDPR, any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of a violation of the GDPR is entitled to compensation

data without a legitimate basis, in breach of Article 6 GDPR. For the violation of Article 6 GDPR, the AEPD fined the controller €6,000. In order to determine

performance of this purchase contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR). Therefore, the processing is compatible with the GDPR. In the Netherlands, as of 1 July 2018 a passenger

the 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

from its database. The litigation chamber concluded to a violation of the GDPR considering that: - the controller did not stop the sending of direct marketing

meaning of the GDPR, and such processing of personal data did not fall within the scope of the "household exemption". Therefore, the GDPR applied in full

to information under Article 15 of the GDPR, especially since it can be deduced from recitals 9 and 10 of the GDPR that the European legislator did not intend

article 12, second paragraph, of the GDPR. 78. Recital 59 of the GDPR further clarifies the standard in Article 12 of the GDPR: “There should be arrangements

ones processing. Decision on the merits 07/2021 - 14/25 10 recital 50 GDPR. Recital 50 of the GDPR states that this is a separate legal basis required for

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

of Art. 9 GDPR do not apply because the plaintiff did not seek to process that kind of data. The legality is thus determined by Art. 6 GDPR. In the absence

of access under Article 15 GDPR? By denying the complainant access, did the respondent infringe Articles 12(1) or 12(2) GDPR? The NAIH that the complainant's

which it is up to him to implement (article5.1.a) of the GDPR - explained in recital 39 of the GDPR). Different consequencesarising from one or the other

according to the first sentence of recital 41 of the GDPR, a legal basis, on which (the here relevant) Art. 9(2)(i) of the GDPR is based, does not necessarily

processing of personal data is carried out in accordance with the GDPR. In doing so, the GDPR requires, among other things, that the nature and scope of the

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

6.1.f) GDPR) and in this balancing the considerations of the GDPR related to Art. 6.1.f) GDPR eligible [...] be taken, in particular Recital 47. Thus

controller/employer, the free of the worker's consent can be questioned (Recital 43 of the GDGR and opinion of the Group of Article 29" on data protection

considers that, in accordance with the provisions of recital 63 of the GDPR and Article 15(4) of the GDPR, it is not obliged to respond to them if it would

Article 17 GDPR (cf. Article 17 (3) b GDPR). In that case, the data subject does not have the right to object as referred to in Article 21 GDPR, because

right to lodge a complaint as per Article 77 GDPR, in conjunction with Recital 141, and Article 57(1)(f) GDPR. The Board referenced an earlier decision (PVN-2017-09)

with the principles of the GDPR, in particular that of lawfulness, by violating the provisions of Articles 6 and 5(1)(a) GDPR. Share your comments here

violation of Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, and the controller had no legal basis for the processing as required by Article 6 GDPR. As a result of the violations

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

(ANSPDCP) fined leasing company €15,000 for violation of Article 32(1) and (2) GDPR after investigating a data breach reported by the company, where the personal

data to be delete. It brought a legal action based on Article 17 GDPR and Article 21 GDPR, read in conjunction with the Dutch Data Protection Act (Wet bescherming

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SEVENTH: Notification of the aforementioned initiation

2.1.2. The scope of the GDPR and the jurisdiction of the Disputes Chamber34. In principle, the defendant argues that the GDPR would not apply in thisfile

administrative sanction to be imposed, we should read certain recitals of the RGPD, among others, recital 148, which indicates the following: 'In order to strengthen

means of such activity, by virtue of article 4.7 of the GDPR. For its part, article 5.1.c) of the GDPR regulates the “principles relating to processing” establishing

via letter as well. According to the BVwG, this is in line with recital 63 of the GDPR ("Where possible, the controller should be able to provide remote

proceedings”, that “Recital 65 of the GDPR also includes the exception of the legal defense as provided for in article 17.3.e of the GDPR to the right to erasure"

sensitive personal data under Article 9 GDPR and their lack of valid consent to do so under Article 6(1) GDPR. In 2020, the Norwegian Consumer Council

Article 9(2)(j) GDPR could be a legal basis for scientific research purporses or statistical purposes. Lastly, Recital 46 of the GDPR specifically mentions

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 A and

is charged with committing an offense for violation of article 6.1 of the GDPR, which states that: "one. The treatment will only be lawful if it complies

warning, in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) of the GDPR, in connection with the above-mentioned Recital 148. Therefore, in accordance with the applicable

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

although the Applicant’s letter is June 2020 It is dated 23 July, and it was not actually dispatched until 23 July 2020. The Applicant a In support of its statement

accurate and lawfully processed (see recital 63 GDPR). Automated decision-making and profiling 4.8. Pursuant to Article 22 GDPR, [applicants] have the right,

information.” Recitals 39 and 60 of the GDPR help clarify the scope of the right of information provided to interested parties. Recital 39 establishes:

However, the DPA concluded that the controller did not violate Article 15(2) GDPR by asking for more information to identify the data subject when the data

of the GDPR, and even less than one month between the deletion from the edict file and the request for deletion pursuant to Article 17 of the GDPR. Furthermore

own security protocols. This therefore breached Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR. The initial sanction for infringing Article 5(1)(f) was a fine

constitutes personal data, and is thus the scope of the GDPR. In accordance with recital 59 of the GDPR, the controller should be obliged to respond to requests

proceeding personal data under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. Lursoft claim to be have such a legal basis under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. However, this was rejected by the Latvian

consent under Article 8 GDPR also apply? Did the defendant, as the controller, fail to adhere to the data transparency (Article 5(1)(a) GDPR) and the data minimisation

in both Belgium and the UK, violated Article 15(1) GDPR, Article 15(3) GDPR and Article 12(3) GDPR GDPR for deleting data instead of providing access to

subjects? The Polish DPA found that the University violated Article 33(1) GDPR and Article 34, because it had notified neither the supervisory authority

personal data to the jewellery company Pandora SA according to Article 17 GDPR. The company asked him to submit his passport or driving license before considering

"more options" page or definitively confirm the creation of their account. 23. 23. If the architecture described in the previous point means that the user

Article 12(3) in relation to Article 15 GDPR. The Garante hence applied an administrative fine as per Article 83(5) GDPR. The amount of such fine was set at

of the general information duty included in Article 13 GDPR. Is this a violation of Article 13 GDPR? The AEPD held that there had been a violation of Article

all the persona data mentioned by virtue of Article 15(1) GDPR, in the lights of Recital (63) GDPR. Thus, the authority ruled that the lack of a complete

verifying the identity of the requesting third party. It also recalled Recital 40 GDPR, which emphasises that each data processing must be based on consent

10 complainant (article 6.1 a) of the GDPR combined with article 7 of the GDPR), (2) article 6.1 c) of the GDPR in that the publication results on the

Respondent explained that the GDPR does not recognize any express “group privilege”, but it can be deduced from Recital 48 to the GDPR that an exchange of customer

under Article 21 GDPR can be made at any time and several times. It also found that a provisional measure can be granted under Article 21 GDPR if an urgent

(minutes of acceptance of oral explanations are attachments No. 1 and No. 23 to the inspection protocol) that a survey was conducted in order to identify

Articles 6 and 13 GDPR? The AEPD decided to impose, for infringement of Article 6 GDPR, a fine of € 10000 and, for infringement of Article 13 GDPR, a fine of

hours of employees without having informed them in accordance with Article 13 GDPR. The AEPD received a letter filed by the interested party against the respondent

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 for

of the GDPR. 92. 92. Firstly, the restricted formation emphasises that, in this case, the criterion provided for in Article 83(2)(a) of the GDPR relating

account data under Article 15 GDPR? Is GDPR applicable to a case that was still pending before the DPA on 25. 5. 2018? GDPR applies to cases pending before

infringement of Article 32 GDPR. Therefore, the Spanish DPA issued a warning sanction for each violation of Article 5(1)(f) and Article 32 GDPR. AEPD highlighted

(AEPD) imposed a warning on a Spanish public notary for infringing Article 13 GDPR by not offering the claimant relevant information when obtaining a copy of

provisions of the GDPR that are directly applicable do not supersede the provisions of the VStG and to the extent that Art. 83 (8) GDPR and recital 148 are ordered

Articles 6, 7 and 12 of the GDPR. In the contested decision, the Belgian DPA found the infringement of Article 6, 7, 12, 13 and 24 GDPR sufficiently proven. In

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, acting beyond

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

constitutes personal data according with Article 4(1) GDPR therefore its processing falls within the scope of GDPR. The DPA also analysed whether the controller