Search results

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

specialized website. AG Bobek is also of the opinion that Article 6(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR do not preclude national rules from laying down, without

Articles 6(1)(c) and (e), 6(3) and 9(1) GDPR. The preliminary questions concern the issue whether the existence of a legal obligation – Article 6(1)(c) GDPR

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

their health status, without appropriate legal grounds, as required by art. 6 GDPR and art 2-ter and 2-septies of the Italian Privacy Code, and going against

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)

par. 1, letter a) and c); 6, par. 1, letter c) and e), par. 2 and par. 3, letter b) and Article 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3, caused by the conduct of the

Articles 6(1)(c) or 6(1)(e). Therefore, the DPA issued a sanction of €2000 against the Municipality for violating Articles 6(1)(c), (e), 6(2), and 6(3)(b).

with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject, under Article 6 (1) (c) GDPR. In this case, the compliants' personal data remained published

to be heard by the Authority, within 30 days (Article 166, paragraphs 6 and 7, of the Code, and Article 18, paragraph 1, by Law No. 689 of 24/11/1981)

with art. 5 and 6 of the GDPR? The DPA held that Regione Campania violated art 5(1)(a)(c), art. 6(1)(c)(e), art. 6(2) and art. 6(3)(b) GDPR, and concluded

Municipality lawful in accordance with Articles 5(1)(c), 6(1)(c), (e), 6(2), and 6(3)(b) GDPR? The DPA held that the disclosure of the personal data by

Art. 6 para. 1 sentence 1 lit. c, para. 3 sentence 1, Art. 86 GKG § 47 (1), § 52 (2), § 53 (2) no. 2, § 63 (3) sentence 1 no. 2, § 66 (3) sentence 3, § 68

the processing, together with the Privacy Ordinance Article 6 No. 1 letter c or e, cf. Article 6 No. 3, as of Arendal municipality is stated as a basis for

legal basis for processing the data under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. The Latvian DPA also held that Article 6(1)(e) GDPR could not be relied upon as a legal basis

the present case. Under Article 6.3.b) andof recital 45 of the GDPR, processing based on Article 6.1.e) must fulfill twoconditions:- The data controller

reasons, article 780, 3° of the Judicial Code, article 149 of the Constitution and article 6 of the ECHR - the pleas not explicitly stated. 17.3.3. The Procurement

the basis of article 6.1 e) GDPR read together with articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR. 3) Violation of Articles 12.1, 12.6, 13.1 and 13.2 GDPR: the Inspection

legal obligation within the meaning of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. The second and third question Since Article 6(1)(f) GDPR is the legal basis for the controller's

communications under Article 14 GDPR were not legally necessary, as in the present case, Article 23 GDPR restrictions were applicable. Article 23 GDPR establishes

the Slovenian National Institute of Public Health? The IP held that Article 6(3) GDPR applies in this context. As such the legal basis for processing is

King under Article 88 of the Belgian Constitution. Lawfulness The DPA examined the existence of a legal basis on the basis of Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, which requires

no legal basis. This was a breach of Article 5(1) GDPR, Article 6(3) GDPR, Article 9(1) GDPR and Article 9(3) GDPR as well as Swedish health care legislation

follows from Article 6 (3) of the GDPR that the legal basis for the processing referred to in Article 6 (1), preamble and under c, of the GDPR must be determined

articles 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

under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, Article 6(3) GDPR, (and the Norwegian Personal Data Act § 8). The Norwegian Privacy Appeals Board noted that under Article 5(1)(b)

processing of personal data on the basis of Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, and the requirement of Article 6(3)(b) GDPR was satisfied, too. Also, the VGH held it to

DPA held that the controller had violated Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR, thus also Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, for lack of legal basis for publishing

follows from Article 6(3) of the Basic Regulation that legal obligations in other Member States are not relevant. Furthermore, Article 3(1), first sentence

including the general conditions on the 10Art. 6, 1, (c) of the GDPR. 11 art. 6, 1, (e) of the GDPR 12Art. 6.3 of the AVG. Decision on the merits 124/2021

authority under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR and whether a clear legal obligation prescribing such processing was given as per Article 6(3) GDPR. In this, the DPA

the City wished to rely on Articles 6(1)(e) and 9(1)(g) GDPR. Under Article 6(3) GDPR, reliance on Article 6(1)(e) GDPR as a legal basis for processing must

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

meaning of Article 4 (1) and (2) GDPR, this would be justified under Article 6 (1)(c) and (3). The court also found that the VIG complies with Article 86 GDPR:

recitals of the GDPR and to Article 86 GDPR which concerns public access to official documents, as well as Article 6(2) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR which provides

17 (1) (c) GDPR also opens up to provisions of national law via the implicit reference to Art. 6 GDPR; According to Art. 6 Para. 2, 3 GDPR, the national

to events during the Covid-19 pandemic violates Articles 5, 6(3)(b), 9, 13, 14, 25 and 32 GDPR. On the 22nd of April 2021, the Decree Law (decreto legge)

meaning of Article 6 Paragraph 3 in conjunction with Paragraph 1 Letter c) or Letter e) GDPR, whereby according to Article 85 Paragraph 1, 2 GDPR the protection

legislator used the open clause of Article 6(1)(c) and (e) GDPR, in combination with Article 6(2) and Article 6(3) GDPR, to create a legal basis for the

Protection Regulation article 6 no. 1 letters c and e, and that the supplementary legal basis according to article 6 no. 3 was Church Act § 3 no. 10 and provisions

and (1)(e) of Article 6 GDPR. The violation of Article 2-ter of the Code is a direct consequence of the violation of Articles 5 and 6 GDPR. Finally, the

and (2) GDPR; b. a breach of Article 12(1) and (6) GDPR, Article 13(1) and (2) GDPR and Article 14(1) and (2) GDPR, Article 5(2) GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR

basis of consent, Article 6 (1) (a) GDPR. In particular, Article 6 (1) (c) (legal obligation of the controller and Article 6 (1) (e) GDPR (public interest)

basis as per Article 6(3) GDPR to process the transaction personal data ("bongdata" in Norwegian) as intended, and based on Article 58(2)(f) GDPR imposed a

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

materia di protezione dei dati personali”; and of Article 6(1)(c), Article 6(1)(e), Article 6(2) and Article 6(3)(b). The Italian DPA did not impose a fine because

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

accordance with Article 6(2) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR for adaptation to the application of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(1)(e) GDPR. The court stressed

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

safeguards (see Article 32(1)(a) GDPR); Handling of personal data breaches (see Article 34(3)(a) GDPR); Changing purposes of data processing (Article 6(4)(e) GDPR);