Search results

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

Category:Article 83 GDPR The wording “infringements of this Regulation” in Article 83(1) GDPR is slightly imprecise. In fact, Article 83(5)(d) GDPR also provides

deadline. Therefore, the DPA held that the controller violated Article 58(1) and Article 83(5)(e) GDPR. The DPA thus fined the controller €300. The Romanian DPA

provisions of Article 5(1)(a), 5(1)(f), and Article 6(1)(a) GDPR) and €50 (for violating Article 58(1)(a), 58(1)(e) and Article 83(5)(e) GDPR). Thus, the

basis in Article 6 GDPR. Neither consent nor any other legal basis were applicable. Consequently, pursuant to the Articles 83(5)(a) and 83(5)(e), the DPA

provide information and allow access to personal data according to Article 58(1)(a) and (e) GDPR. The controller did not comply. Since the data controller did

Control SA violated the GDPR. The DPA highlighted that failing to provide such information upon request was in breach of Article 83(5)(e) in conjuncture with

typified in Article 83.5.e) of the RGPD, which considers such as: 'failure to provide access in breach of Article 58(1)'. The same Article states that

sanction Vodafone in accordance with Article 83(5)(e) GDPR, for the non-compliance with an order pursuant to Article 58(1) GDPR. For this infringement, the AEPD

infringement of article 83.5.e) of the RGPD, in an initial assessment, the The following factors are considered to be concurrent: - No direct benefits (83.2 k) RGPD

non-compliance with this measure, the sanction referred to in Article 83, paragraph 5, letter e) of the Regulation shall be applied at the administrative level

had violated the provisions of Article 83(5)(e) GDPR, in conjunction with the provisions of Articles 58(1)(a) and (e) GDPR by not granting the information

provide the information requested by the DPA violated Article 58(1) GDPR and Article 83(5)(e) GDPR. In conclusion, the Romanian DPA fined the controller

Romanian DPA found that the data controller has violated the provisions of Article 83 (5)(e), by not responding to the Romanian DPA's request of information, during

result, the controller was found in breach of GDPR Article 58(1) and was fined under Article 83(5)(e) GDPR approximately EUR 4,000 (RON 19795.6) and was

responding to the DPA's request for information, Dreamtime Call violated Article 85(3)(e) GDPR. The DPA fined Dreamtime Call approximately €2000 (RON 9.852,2),

to provide the requested information, in violation of Articles 83(5)(e) and 58(1)(a) and (e), and asked for the relevant information to be sent within five

provisions of art. 83 para. (5) lit. e) of the General Regulation on Data Protection and violation of the provisions of art. 83 para. (5) lit. b) of the General

liability in Article 83, Clause 5, Sub-paragraph e) of GDPR. 4.9. The official finds that the SIA is guilty of the violation provided for in Article 83, Clause

lit. a) and lit. e) and art. 58 sec. 2 lit. i) in connection with Art. 83 sec. 1-3 and art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) and art. 83 sec. 5 lit. e) Regulation of the

2 lit. i), art. 83 sec. 1-3, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) and art. 83 sec. 5 lit. e) in connection with Art. 31 and art. 58 section 1 lit. e) Regulation of the

BDSG, Article 5 GDPR, margin number 56 (C.H. Beck 2020) Resta, in Riccio, Scorza, Belisario, GDPR e Normativa Privacy - Commentario, Article 5 GDPR (Wolters

required under the GDPR (e.g. from a security perspective under Article 32 GDPR or as a means of data minimisation under Article 5(1)(c) GDPR) can get confused

non-material damage. Article 32(1) GDPR reflects the principle of integrity and confidentiality enshrined in Article 5(1)(f) GDPR. The controller and the

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

accountability in Article 5(2) GDPR, paragraph (2) specifies further requirements in the general principle of transparency under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, paragraph

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

decision, subject to an administrative sanction from the Garante under Article 83(5)(e) GDPR if the order is not complied with. Although the decision textually

all sanctions mentioned in Chapter VIII GDPR, i.e. the damages under Article 82 GDPR and fines under Article 83 GDPR. In any case, should fines for conduct

violation of article 6.1. RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a), and article 31, in relation to article 58.1.e), both of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.e) of the

contrast 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

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 33 GDPR, p. 642-643 (Oxford University Press 2020). According to Bensoussan, the drafting of Article 33 GDPR drew inspiration

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 of processing (Article 18 GDPR), notification obligation

personal data. The entity can rely on Article 6(1)(e) GDPR. Equally to Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR require that Union or Member State

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

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

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

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) GDPR)

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

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)

pursuant to Article 83(5)(e) GDPR. Second, the DPA considered the non-compliance with the summons to breach breach of Article 58(1)(a) and (e) GDPR. The delay

further details see Article 14(1)(d) GDPR. Similar to the ex-ante information in Article 13(1)(e) and 14(1)(e) GDPR, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR requires the controller

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

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

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

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

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

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

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