Search results

From GDPRhub
  • complaint. The concerned supervisory authorities were located in Germany, Norway, Spain, Denmark, Poland, Italy, and Portugal. The concerned controller provided
    37 KB (4,294 words) - 15:52, 25 October 2022
  • Concerned regulatory authorities have been the authorities in Germany, Norway, Denmark, Estonia and Portugal. 1.2 What is stated in the complaint The
    131 KB (14,752 words) - 08:36, 5 July 2023
  • decision. The concerned supervisory authorities were the DPA's of Denmark, Norway and a German DPA. First, with regard to the sending of the e-mail to the
    54 KB (6,188 words) - 14:20, 1 March 2023
  • supervisory authorities were the DPA's of Denmark, Finland, Germany, France, Norway and the Netherlands. The Swedish DPA started an investigation into the controller
    10 KB (1,505 words) - 15:07, 7 February 2023
  • protection authorities in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Ger- many, Finland, Norway and Poland. The complaint The complaint states the following. On 6 June
    14 KB (1,856 words) - 16:48, 19 October 2022
  • the data protection authority of Berlin (Germany), the authorities from Norway, Poland, Estonia, Sweden, France, Italy, Lower Saxony (Germany), Bavaria-
    60 KB (9,630 words) - 12:34, 13 December 2023
  • of 28 June 2018 Nos 60798/10 and 65599/10 and in the case of Høiness v. Norway of 19 March 2019 No. 43624/14. Instruction: Pursuant to the provisions of
    14 KB (2,229 words) - 14:36, 30 March 2022
  • whose chain operations include approximately 1,800 shops in Finland, Sweden, Norway, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Sales According to information received
    61 KB (9,477 words) - 13:38, 12 January 2024
  • data in question. The controller operates in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway. According to the controller, the information is processed in the group's
    51 KB (7,788 words) - 07:42, 29 March 2023
  • authorities concerned have been the data protection authorities in Denmark, Norway and Finland. The complaints The complainants have mainly stated the following
    37 KB (4,179 words) - 07:51, 7 June 2023
  • Germany, Postal address: Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal and Box 8114 Hungary. 104 20 Stockholm Website: www.imy
    42 KB (4,784 words) - 08:22, 20 October 2022
  • supervisory authorities have been the data protection authorities in Denmark, Norway and Finland. The complaints The complaints essentially state the following
    39 KB (4,578 words) - 08:16, 24 April 2024
  • North Rhine Westphalia, Berlin), Portugal, Sweden, Ireland, Latvia, Italy, Norway, Hungary, Austria, Spain, France, Cyprus, Slovakia, Denmark, Slovenia. 36
    84 KB (14,035 words) - 16:56, 12 December 2023
  • namely Iceland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Norway and Liechtenstein by a Decision of the EEA Joint Committee of 6 July 2018
    131 KB (22,429 words) - 16:57, 12 December 2023
  • authorities of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, France, United Kingdom". 2. The preliminary investigation
    96 KB (15,258 words) - 16:36, 19 March 2024
  • authorities concerned were the authorities of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Norway and Germany. Share blogs or news articles here! The decision below is a
    103 KB (15,684 words) - 07:17, 12 July 2023
  • authorities have been 104 20 Stockholm the data protection authorities in Denmark, Norway and Finland. Website: www.imy.se E-mail: imy@imy.se 1 Telephone: regarding
    56 KB (6,423 words) - 08:14, 30 April 2024
  • authority of Berlin (Germany), the self- control authorities of: Denmark, Norway, Rhineland-Palatinate (Germany), Lower Sa- Ionia (Germany), Sweden, Portugal
    46 KB (7,141 words) - 13:00, 18 January 2024
  • authorities have been the data protection authorities of Denmark, France, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Germany and Austria. The complaint The complaint essentially states
    65 KB (7,759 words) - 10:10, 30 April 2024
  • Human Rights - the judgment pronounced in the Bladet Tromso and Stensaas v. Norway case, ruled that documents from state institutions should represent sources
    56 KB (9,274 words) - 14:44, 5 October 2022
  • for individuals should also increase (ECtHR: Bladet Tromsø and Stensaasv. Norway, application number: 21980/93, 1999, decision on the merits and satisfaction)
    192 KB (30,170 words) - 10:11, 17 November 2023
  • thisprocedure the control authorities of Belgium, Greece, Cyprus, Denmark, Saxony,Norway, Sweden, France, Hungary, Poland, Berlin, Lower Saxony, Slovakia, Ireland
    206 KB (32,869 words) - 14:36, 13 December 2023
  • play its vital role of ‘public watchdog’ (see Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v Norway (1999) 29 EHRR 125, paras 59 and 62, and Pedersen v Denmark (2004) 42 EHRR
    137 KB (20,826 words) - 14:03, 23 February 2022
  • supervisory authorities (CSA): the Netherlands, Latvia, Italy, Sweden, Slovenia, Norway, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Denmark, France, Finland, Greece, Spain, Luxemburg
    429 KB (58,279 words) - 09:12, 2 November 2022
  • General Data Protection Regulation are the supervisory authorities of Sweden, Norway and Estonia, as the processing that is the subject of the complaint affects
    149 KB (24,224 words) - 12:20, 2 January 2023
  • population of Liechtenstein was approximately 39,000; and e. The population of Norway was approximately 5 million. 716. By reference to the Eurostat figures,
    830 KB (115,261 words) - 15:37, 22 February 2022
View ( | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)