Search results

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

BDSG, Article 32 GDPR, margin number 28 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). Jandt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 32 GDPR, margin number 29 (C.H. Beck

reviewe the security of the data processed by the processor under Article 28(3)(a) and (h) GDPR. For these reasons, the responsibility of the security incident

expressed in Article 5 (1 ) (a)) f, and reflected in the obligations set out in Article 24 (1), Article 25 (1), Article 32 (1 ) (b ) and (d) and Article 32 (2)

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

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

14(2)(g) GDPR; access rights under Article 15(1)(h) GDPR; or the the need to perform data protection impact assessments under Article 35(3)(a) GDPR. Profiling

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

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

both Article 13(1) and Article 13(2) of the GDPR. See, Bäcker, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 13 GDPR, margin number 20 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition)

out pursuant to Article 83(1) GDPR. This part of Article 83 concerns the principle of "unity of action" (see above). With Article 83(3) GDPR, the legislator

proportionate (Article 7 and 8 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) and in compliance with Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR. According to Article 6(3) GDPR, the legal

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

(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)

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

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)

under the material part of the GDPR and the controller-processor agreement pursuant to Article 28 GDPR. Article 82(6) GDPR states that claims for damages

provided for in Article 6(1)(a) GDPR or, as the case may be, Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, and consent is withdrawn according to Article 7(3) GDPR, data must be

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

commentary under Article 33(3)(a) GDPR. Jandt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 34 GDPR, margin number 11 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). In our

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

respect of Article 33. If a controller who is not established in the EU but falls under the scope of Article 3(2) or Article 3(3) of the GDPR experiences

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

under Article 79 GDPR – or both. This flexibility allows for parallel proceedings under both Article 77 GDPR and under Article 79 GDPR. As the GDPR foresees

Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 7 GDPR, margin number 80 (C.H. Beck, 2nd Edition 2018). Stemmer, in Wolff, Brink, BeckOK Datenschutzrecht, Article 7 GDPR, margin number

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

EDPB in accordance with Article 70(1)(b) GDPR. According to Article 45(5) GDPR, the continued monitoring referred to in paragraph 3, or other information

Kühling/Buchner, DSGVO, Article 2 GDPR, margin number 15 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Bäcker, in Wolff, Brink, BeckOK Datenschutzrecht, Article 2 GDPR, margin number

relying on another legal basis under Article 6 GDPR, or can use either of the exceptions under Article 17(3) GDPR, the processing can carry on. The controller

Gola, DS-GVO, Article 4 GDPR, margin number 106 (C.H. Beck 2018). EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November

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

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)

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

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

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

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

Datenschutzrecht, Article 73 GDPR, margin number 3 (C.H. Beck 2019, 1st edition). Nguyen, in Gola, DS-GVO, Article 73 GDPR, margin number 2 (C.H. Beck 2018,

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

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

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)

BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin number 4 (C.H. Beck 2020). Boehm, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 59 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition)

BDSG, Article 69 GDPR, margin number 4 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Dix in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 69 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck

processing (Article 36(3)(c) GDPR); the contact details of the Data Protection Officer (DPO) (Article 36(3)(d) GDPR); a copy of the DPIA (Article 36(3)(e) GDPR)

Regulation, Article 68 GDPR, margin number 3 (C.H. Beck 2023, 1st edition). Albrecht in Ehmann, Selmayr, Article 68 GDPR, margin number 1 (C.H. C.H. Beck 2018

in point (d) of Article 46(2) and in Article 28(8); (e) aims to authorise contractual clauses referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); or (f) aims to

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

processing through Article 15 GDPR. See, Kamann, Braun, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 16 GDPR, margin number 6 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd

DS-GVO BDSG, Article 53 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). Polenz, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker, Datenschutzrecht, Article 53 GDPR, margin

Datenschutzrecht, Article 80 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck 2019); Bergt in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 80 GDPR, margin number 4 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition)

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

BDSG, Article 78 GDPR, margin number 6 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition); Körffer in Paal, Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 78 GDPR, margin numbers 3-5, (C.H. Beck

DSGVO, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 3 (Jan Sramek 2021). Bergt in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition)

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

DS-GVO BDSG, Article 72 GDPR, margin number 5 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Nguyen in Gola, DS-GVO, Article 72 GDPR, margin numbers 1-2 (C.H. Beck 2018

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

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

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

falls outside the scope of Article 57 GDPR should be deemed inadmissible for the purposes of Article 31 GDPR. Article 31 GDPR can be read as a supporting

see commentary to Article 51(3) GDPR bellow. Article 8(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ("CFR") and Article 16(2) of the Treaty

BDSG, Article 92 GDPR, margin number 8 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). Herbst in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 92 GDPR, margin number 13 (C.H. Beck

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

years as 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

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

this 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

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)

or processor should be approved pursuant to Article 58(3) GDPR, or by the EDPB pursuant to Article 63 GDPR. Where such an approval takes place through

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

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

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

processing), Article 57 GDPR (tasks of SAs), Article 58 GDPR (powers of SAs), as well as Article 65 GDPR (dispute resolution by the board), Article 63 GDPR (consistency

use of trusted third party verification services. Article 8(3) GDPR makes it clear that Article 8(1) GDPR only refers to consent, not to the object of the

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

Hence, Article 89(2) and (3) GDPR also allow for specific derogation to the GDPR for these purposes, as further detailed below. Article 89(1) GDPR provides

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

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

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

decisions in Category:Article 76 GDPR Dix, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 76 GDPR, margin number 1 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Docksey, 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 2020

decisions in Category:Article 26 GDPR Petri, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker gen. Döhmann, Datenschutzrecht, Article 26 GDPR, margin number 12 (C.H. Beck 2019). EDPB

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

all related decisions in Category:Article 3 GDPR EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November 2019 (Version 2.1)

derogation from Article 64(3) and Article 65(2), an urgent opinion or an urgent binding decision referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article shall be adopted

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

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

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

right of control referred to in Article 28(3)(h) GDPR concerning PIKA's provision of the measures required under Article 32 GDPR. Only after a personal data

the personal data to be provided pursuant to Article 15(1) GDPR: must Article 15(3) first sentence of the GDPR be interpreted as meaning that, due to the

claimed party, for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notification of the Commencement Agreement

hereinafter, 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

that under 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

That on August 4, 2019, Mr. H.H.H. contacted me. of the fraudulent transfer department of my bank EVO BANC. The Mr. H.H.H. informed me that in the early

obligation of 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

claimed party, for the alleged infringement of article 6 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR. FOURTH: On January 16, 2023, the aforementioned

Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 26/28 ANNEX IX H.H.H. (hereinafter claimant 9). C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 27/28 ANNEX X I.I.I. *** CHARGE

(2016/679) Article 5 (1) (a), Article 12 (1), (2) and (6) , Article 13, Article 15 (1) (h), (3) and (4), Article 58 (2) (c) and (d) subparagraphs Article 34 (1)

writing (cf. paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 28 of the GDPR), verification of the requirements set out in article 28 of the GDPR it must be substantive and

Appeals Board assessed if a fine could be imposed as per Article 83(5) GDPR, cf. Article 83(2) GDPR, and in which case, how large it should be. The Board

violates 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

(e) and 13(2)(a) GDPR. Thus, it ordered the controller to comply with the GDPR. In addition it fined € 10,000 under Article 58(2)(i) GDPR for the violation

out by the school). Article 9 GDPR, for having processed biometric data without any valid ground from Article 9(2). Article 13 GDPR, for not having informed

data subject (Article 26 GDPR). The processing by the processor must, in accordance with the provisions of article 28 paragraph 3 of the GDPR, be governed

the APD file) dated 3 September 2020, 28 September 2020, 28 September 2020, 28 September 2020, 28 September 2020, 28 September 2020, 28 September 2020 October

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

consent, in line with Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. The Court recalled that Article 31 of the Croatian Law on the Implementation of the GDPR stipulates that the

analogously, Section 823 (1) and (2) BGB in conjunction with Article 6 (1) GDPR and Article 17 GDPR. Claims under data protection law could be asserted by way

his/her consent. The DPA first outlined Article 6(1)(a) and (b) GDPR, Articles 4(11) GDPR on consent, as well as Article 6 of the Spanish Data Protection Law

proceedings Article 77 (1) and Article 22 (b) of the General Data Protection Regulation. may be submitted in the case provided for in Under Article 77 (1) of

obligation violates § Article 13 (3) in conjunction with Article 62 (1) 4 DSG and for the period prior to 25 May 2018 against Article 52 Paragraph 2 no. 7

processor, Vamavi Phone SL, had violated Article 48(1) LGT, Article 21 GDPR in link with Article 23 LOPDGDD and Article 28 GDPR by making a commercial call on behalf

lack of valid consent under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. Thus, it imposed VODAFONE a fine of EUR 75,000 under Article 83(5) GDPR, being indecisive whether there

regard to Article 83.2 (k) of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, Article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", provides: "2. In accordance with Article 83(2)(k)

rowspan="2" width="3"><img src="http://www.dpa.gr:80/APDPXPortlets/images/menutop_space.jpg" width="3" height="104"></td><!--/*++++++++++++++++++++++++3 Υπομενού

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

right 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

provided for in Article 5(1)(a), (e) and (f), Article 5(2), Article 24(1) and (2), Article 28(3), Article 30(1)(d) and (f) and Article 32(1) of the General

art. 24 sec. 1, art. 25 sec. 1, art. 28 sec. 1 and 3 and article. 32 sec. 1 and 2, as well as art. 83 sec. 1 - 3, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) and art. 83 sec

the claimed party, for the alleged violation of Article 32 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.4 of the GDPR. Once the initiation agreement was notified,

required by Article 12 GDPR. The DPA clarified that the right of information and the right of access are distinct. An access request under Article 15 GDPR is not

purposes of diagnosis, assistance and health therapy (Article 9, paragraph 2, lett. h) and par. 3 of the Regulation) and is carried out on the basis of

controller under the GDPR. The data controller did not process personal data with an appropriate level of security, as required by article 32, read in conjunction

(Articles 12 and 14 of the GDPR) - a breach of her right of access (article 15 of the GDPR) - a breach of Article 28 of the GDPR with regard to the quality

Those measures shall be reviewed and, where necessary, updated. Article 28.3 AVG "3. The processing by a processor shall be governed by a contract or

significant (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR). - basic personal identifiers were affected (name, identification number, the line identifier) (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR). The

authority ofcontrol pursuant to Article 58 (2), or failure to provide access in breachof article 58, paragraph 1. "Organic Law 3/2018, on the Protection of

or instead of the measures referred to points (a) to (h) of Article 58(2) and Article 58(2)(a) to (h) paragraph 2(j). When deciding on the imposition of

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

violation of article 28.2 typified in Article 83.4 a) GDPR. SIXTY THOUSAND EUROS (€60,000) for alleged violation of article 28.3 typified in Article 83.4 a)

CIF A76539030, for a violation of article 28.3.g) of the RGPD, in accordance with article 83.4 b) of the RGPD, and article 74.k) of the LOPDGDD, with the

hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notified of the aforementioned start-up

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

violated Article 33(1) GDPR by failing to inform the DPA of the data breach. Second, the DPA held that the controller violated Article 28(1), (3) and (9)

AEPD fined in €2,000 a website for non-GDPR compliant privacy policy, violating Article 13 GDPR. On January 16, 2022 the data subject complaint against

of Article 6(1) GDPR? The Spanish DPA held that the documentation in the file provides evidence that G.L.P. Instalaciones 86, S.L violated Article 6(1)

Resolution was notified on September 28, 2020, by alleged violation of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, proposing a fine of

Articles 57(1) and 58(2) GDPR for the processing of personal data without the consent of the data subject, as foreseen in Article 6 GDPR. Firstly, the DPA found

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

infractions of article 48 of Law 9/2014, of May 9, General of Telecommunications (hereinafter LGT), in accordance with the provisions of the article 84.3 of the

confidentiality. Second, the DPA found a violation of Article 32 GDPR. The DPA held Article 32 GDPR requires the controller to have a complete protocol that

obligations under Article 28 of the GDPR and the responsibilities arising from failure to comply with them. In fact, on the one hand, Article 28, paragraph 1

until the end of the service as indicated in the article itself 28.3.g). And continues article 28.3.h): “will make available to the person in charge all

employee of the entity - infringes Article 32. 2 and 32.4 of the RGPD, an infringement punishable under Article 83.4.a of the GDPR. Assessing the circumstances

internal 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

infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, as defined in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, following the application of Article 85(1) and (3) of LPACAP, a fine

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

violation of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the GDPR. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/9 The proposed

executed. Legal basis: Article 4 lines 1, 2 and 5, Article 11 paragraphs 1 and 2, Article 12 paragraph 2, Article 17 paragraph 1 and Article 58 paragraph 2 lit

information received from MEDISALUD, dated February 28, 2019, in accordance with article 65.4 of Organic Law 3/2018, dated December 5, on the Protection of Personal

subject's data under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. Thus, the data subject was entitled to have the controller delete his personal data per Article 17(1)(d), which allows

the EU Article 28: Processor of processing (regulations) Article 28.3: Arrangements of a contract (or other legal act) with processors Article 29: Processing

the DPA launched a proceeding. The AEPD determined that, according to Article 28(3)(e), the processor has the obligation to assist the controller in the

been deleted by the employer upon request pursuant to Article 16, Article 17 and Article 5(1)(d) GDPR (inaccuracy of personal data). Therefore, the employer

question if Google LLC violated Articles 5 et seqq. GDPR in connection with Article 28(3)(a) and Article 29 GDPR. The DSB fully upheld the complaint with regard

the general rule of Article 15 (1) (a), c) and d) of the GDPR by not giving substantive, specific answers to the request under Article 15 and by sharing

Privacy Regulation (GDPR) article 6 no. 1 letter f. GDPR applies according to the Personal Data Act § 1 as Norwegian law. Legelisten.no (3) Legelisten.no is

such data. 3. Adherence to a code of conduct approved in accordance with article 40 or to a certification mechanism approved under article 42 may serve

obligations arising from article 12.3 and 4 of the GDPR (methods for exercising the data subject's rights) and Article 15.1.b) and c) 5 of the GDPR (right of access

private doctor for violating Article 32 GDPR by making his patients' health data freely accessible on the web, and Article 33 GDPR by not notifying the DPA

more details. Article 2: Substantive scope Article 2.2.c: Exclusively personal or domestic activity Article 3: Territorial scope Article 4.1: Personal

implement 1See e.g. PVN 2019-09 2FOR-2018-07-02-1107. 3 Prop. 56 LS (2017-2018), point 31.3.3.3 4controlling measures in their business. Regulations on

meaning that no violation of Article 5(1)(e) GDPR could be established. Integrity and confidentiality - Article 5(1)(f) GDPR As explained above, the DPA

uncensored form” as intended by the court, i.e. without that 3.20 3.21 3.22 3.23 3.24 3.25 3.26 3.27 3.28 essential information in the deeds had been blacked out

Vodafone on December 3 of the same year, for alleged infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, proposing a fine of

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

violation of Article 13 GDPR and issued a warning to the controller. The AEPD took into account the following aggravating factors (Article 83 (2) GDPR) to determine

DPA held that the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6 GDPR and Section 3 of the Finnish Act on the Protection of

provided for in Article 46(1) of the referred to Law. Finally, it is pointed out that in accordance with the provisions of Article 90.3 a) of the LPACAP

approved appeal of Article 5(1)(a), Article 12(1), Article 13(1) and Article 13(2). The appeal for Article 5(1)(c), Article 6(1) and Article 8 GDPR was not approved

infractions of article 48 of Law 9/2014, of May 9, General Telecommunications (hereinafter LGT), in accordance with the provisions of the article 84.3 of the LGT

for fraud prevention under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Did the company’s policy breach Article 6 or any other articles of the GDPR? The Garante held that the

as established in article 5 of the GDPR. The security of personal data is regulated in articles 32, 33 and 34 of the GDPR. III The GDPR defines personal

in Article 12(5) GDPR, Article 15(4) GDPR or Article 16 of the Norwegian Personal Data Act were applicable. The DPA ordered the controller (Article 58(2)(d)

rectification.(article 16 of the GDPR), the right to be forgotten (article 17 of the GDPR), and the right to limit the use ofdata processed unlawfully (article 18

virtue of Article 17(3)(b) GDPR. Indeed, it further is justified that the task carried out in the public interest under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR does not constitute

legal bases of contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR), legal obligation (Article 6(1)(c) GDPR) and legitimate interest (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR) and determined that

this case under Article 6(1)(a) or 6(1)(c)? If Article 6(1)(a) applies, do the requirements for parental consent under Article 8 GDPR also apply? Did the

processing plea 6: the right to object - Article 21(1) AVG plea 7: Article 12(3) TFEU - no infringement plea 8: Article 20 AVG-Right of transfer-the warning-not

constitutes sensitive data within the meaning of Article 9 GDPR. The DPA alluded to Article 9(1) GDPR which prohibits the processing of these special categories

Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 3 3/8IBy virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD recognizes to eachcontrol authority,

identify the data subject and it shall justify the reasons, as per Article 12(3) GDPR. AEPD stated that, with the documentation provided, the data subject

the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or on Article 9, (c) where the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a), the existence of the

principles are found under Article 5(1)(a) and Article 5(2) GDPR respectively]. The Spanish DPA even made reference to Recital 40 GDPR on the legality of processing

logically been taken up in Article 5(1)(b) of the GDPR under the Principles relating to the processing of personal data (Chapter II). Article 5(1)(b) of the RGPD

L. for the infringement of Article 13 GDPR (data privacy policy) and a warning penalty for the infringement of Article 7 GDPR regarding the collection of

thearticle 5.1.f), in relation to article 6.1 of the RGPD.The violation of article 5.1.f) of the RGPD is typified in article 83.5.a)of the RGPD. The LOPDGDD

fine, the criteria specified in the same Article 83." 112. Under Article 83 of the GDPR, as referred to in Article 20(III) of the Data Protection Act: "1

data, recorded in copies Article 6 (1) of the GDPR and, in the case of health data, Article 9 of the GDPR. Article 1 (1); (3) did not provide clear and

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

measures to security of processing, in accordance with Article 32 GDPR, in connection with Article 24 GDPR, as the controller did not take into account the risks

sanction is imposed for violation of Article 6.1.a) of the GDPR of 3,000 euros. VIII Infringement of Article 13 of the GDPR The facts claimed also provide evidence

the GDPR is the provisions directly imposing obligations on processors. [...] In this regard, the [EDPS] considers that Article 28(3) of the GDPR, while

violated Articles 5(1)(a) and 13 GDPR, as it did not provide the data subject with a proper privacy policy. Article 28 GDPR was also infringed, as no controller-processor

the analysis of a health establishment's activities are collected. Article 9(3) GDPR provides that health data may be processed for the purposes of the

aggravating circumstance according to Article 83(2)(i) or as a separate violation according to Article 83(5)(e) or Article 83(6). Since the situation at hand

investigations the CNIL found five breaches of the GDPR: -         Violation of the right to object, Article 21(2) GDPR: no procedure was implemented to ensure effectively

based on Article 6.1.f) of the GDPR, but not for all processing based on this article. […] 73 74Investigation report, page 22, point 4.4.2.3.3. WP 260 rev

February 2019 to February 28, 2019, the date on which thefinal discharge.C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 3 3/11THIRD: On February

violated Articles 12(3), (4), 13(2)(b), 30(1)(d) and (g) of the GDPR and issued a warning by virtue of Article 58(2)(b) of the GDPR. Due to the anonimisation

of the provisions as set out in Article 95 § 2 and Article 98 of the ICA. They are also informed, pursuant to Article 99 of the ICA, of the time limits

right of access under Article 15 of the GDPR and the right to erasure (‘forgotten’) under Article 17 of the GDPR, Article 12 of the GDPR on measures to exercise

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 a Luxembourg

online booking platform, for failing to comply with Article 12(3) GDPR and because Article 6(1)(f) GDPR was not a valid legal basis to publish personal data

incomplete with regards to several requirements set in Article 28(3) GDPR, and notably points b, c, e, f, g and h. For example, the processing agreement did not

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

All this is in violation of Article 22 GDPR. The requirements of proportionality and subsidiarity have also not been met. 3.3. Furthermore, prior to the

for processing a data subject's personal data without a legal basis (Article 6(1) GDPR). Flip Energy had switched switched the data subject over from the

the footage (3 seconds), that it did not show any faces or the theft itself, did not concern any personal data as per Article 9 GDPR or Article 10 and was

guarantee the autonomy of the DPO 1. On the principles 28. According to Article 38.3 of the GDPR, the body must ensure that the DPO "does not receive no

obligation by providing the information required under Art. 14 (1) – (3) of the GDPR only in relation to the persons whose e-mail addresses it had at its

found that the right to a copy under Article 15(3) GDPR is independent from the right to access under Article 15(1) GDPR and is to be construed extensively

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

to Article 28 (2) of the Administrative Procedure Act in conjunction with Article 24 (1) and (5) of the Federal Data Protection Act as amended. 3.3.5 Pursuant

minimisation under Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, and contrary to the obligation to obtain the freely given consent of the data subject under Article 6(1)(a) GDPR, when refusal

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

articles 12.5 and 15.3 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and in the sections 3 and 4 of article 13 of this organic law. " FIFTH: Article 15 of the RGPD provides

purpose limitation in accordance with Article 5 Paragraph 1 Letter b GDPR (Paal/Pauly/Paal, 3rd edition 2021, GDPR Article 15 Rn. 24). The plaintiff has a right

subjects, according to Article 33(1) GDPR and Article 34(1) GDPR? The PUODO held that the insurance company infringed the GDPR provisions, failing to notify

plain. The word "concise" in Article 12(1) GDPR, however, does not mean incomplete, all mandatory information from Article 13 GDPR must still be included. The

established in Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR. Therefore, the Belgian DPA found the controller to have breached Article 15 GDPR in conjunction with Article 12(3) and

under Article 36 GDPR) regarding the compliance of the envisaged processing with the GDPR. According to the Commission, the legal basis was Article 6(1)(e)

(f), Article 5(2), Article 6(1), Article 7(1), Article 24(1), Article 25(1), Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(c) and Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(c) and

the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article 15 GDPR and Article 25(1) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued

company for faulty website security (article 32 GDPR) and violation of the storage limitation principle (article 5(1)(e) GDPR). After a complaint in 2018, the

connection with Article 5 paragraph 1 point a, Article 5 paragraph 2, Article 6 paragraph 1, Article 7 paragraph 3, Article 12 paragraph 2, Article 17 paragraph

6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/11 SECOND: In accordance with article 65.4 of Organic Law 3/2018, of 5 December, Protection of Personal Data

van volksgezondheid overeenkomstig artikel 9, lid 2, punten h) en i), en artikel 9, lid 3; d) met het oog op archivering in het algemeen belang, wetenschappelijk

follows The appeal is dismissed as unfounded. Legal basis: Article 51(1), Article 57(1)(f) and Article 77(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the basic data protection

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.

under Article 4(1) GDPR. These statistics even included health data which qualify as a special category of personal data under Article 9(1) GDPR. The Datatilsynet

violation of article 6.1. f) of the RGPD, in relation with article 20.1 c) of the LOPDGDD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the cited GDPR That by writing

connection with Article 31, Article 58(1)(e) in connection with Article 83(1-3) and Article 83(5)(e) of Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of

for processing personal data without a legal ground as required by Article 6(1) GDPR, after hiring a handwriting expert to determine that an alleged signature

a bank was subject to the GDPR in its capacity as a controller and should have answered access requests under Article 15 GDPR.   The complainants are clients

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 a Luxembourg

Regulation (Article 85) and the Code (Articles 136 et seq.); h) the adoption of suitable measures to eliminate the consequences of the violation (Article 83, paragraph

comes regulated in article 32 of the GDPR. II Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR establishes the following: "Article 5 Principles relating

obligations under Article 5(1)(f) and Article 32 of GDPR. Article 5 (1) : Ticketmaster has failed to comply with the requirements of GDPR including to process

fact that the processing of the controller relied on Article (6)(1)(b) GDPR and Article 6(1)(c) GDPR as legal basis affects the holding of the DPA since

violated Article 12 GDPR, as it did not facilitate the data subject´s exercise of their rights, especially the right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR. In view

2016/679 (Article 83 (2 ) (h) of the Regulation 2016/679); e) compliance with previously applied in the same case the measures are laid down in Article. 58 sec

rating, breaching Article 6(1) GDPR, and required the company to implement a policy for conducting credit ratings per Article 24 GDPR. A person lodged a

---------- Article 1: The intervention of the PDU - What to choose is allowed. Article 2: The request of the company Google LLC is rejected. Article 3: This

Schaffland/Holthaus in Schaffland/Wiltfang, GDPR, Article 15 GDPR paragraph 44; loc. A. Härting, CR 2019, 219). 136 (3) In accordance with the above legal principles

under Article 15 GDPR to the defendant and requested i.a. information on concrete recipients of their personal data under Article 15(1)(c) GDPR. The defendant

AEPD concluded that the defendant could have breached Article 13 GDPR, Article 7 GDPR and Article 22(2) LSSI: there was no identification of the data controller

highly sensitive personal data exposed, thus breaching Article 32(1)(b) GDPR and Article 32(2), cf. Article 24. An employee in a municipal health care center

related to in-game chat messages. 3. Reasons for the decision of the DPA 3.1. It follows from Article 15 of the GDPR that the data subject has the right

the LPACAP, for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SIXTH: On January 23, 2023, DIGI requests a

breach of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR. Was the publication of the census copies a breach of the data integrity and confidentiality principle under Article 5(1)(f)

breach Article 13 GDPR even if the contact form is not operational? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) held that the defendant, PSI, violated Article 13 GDPR by failing

consent of the 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

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

according to Article 82 GDPR. The District Court rejected the claim of the data subject. It held that the controller did not violate Article 15(1) GDPR. It found

right of rectification of Article 16 GDPR and Article 14 of LOPDGDD, the national data protection law, the DPA stated that Article 12(4) LOPDGDD obliges the

indicated in point 3.3 of this decision. 4.3. Safety measures applied to the storage of traffic data. The conduct ascertained in point 3.4 of this decision

public interest in the field of public health in accordance with Article 9(2)(h) and (i) and (3); (d) for archiving purposes in the public interest, for the

with Article 5 (1) (a) and Article 6 (1) (f) GDPR. Thus, the controller failed to comply with the accountability principle under Article 5 (2) GDPR. Second

infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD typified in Article 83.5.a) of the RGPD and considered very serious, for the purposes of prescription, in Article 72.1

as Article 57 (1) (a), Article 58 (2) (e) and (i), Article 83 (1) - (3) and Article 83 (4) (a) in connection with Article 33 (1) and Article 34 (1), (2)

Norway, and not the GDPR. The DPA does, however, refer to corresponding Articles in the GDPR: Articles 5(1)(b) and (c), as well as Article 17. Share blogs

typified in article 83.4 of the RGPD and is qualified as serious in article 73.1 g) of the LOPDPGDD for prescription purposes.III Article 58.Article 58.2 of

directly on the basis of the GDPR, not the register assessed on the basis of Article 30(1) of the GDPR. II.3. Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR 49. Above, the Disputes

proportionate and complies with the article 83 of the GDPR. The Litigation Chamber fully complied with article 83.1 of the GDPR and principle of proportionality

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

that the controller had not violated Article 45 GDPR nor any of the subsequent Articles from Chapter V of the GDPR. The AEPD took into account that the

infringement of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, afine of 75,000 euros (seventy-five thousand euros).SECOND: Under article 58.2.d)

surveillance of Rognan center, cf. Article 6 of the Privacy Ordinance. 4.3. Assessment of the principle of legality in Article 5 (1) (a) The requirement that

of the GDPR. To 2): c) Article 50b (2) DSG 2000 (for the period prior to 25 May 2018) (d) Article 13(3) DSG (for the period from 25 May 2018) To 3): c) Article

general data protectionArticle 5 (1) (a), Article 5 (2), Article 12 (1) and (4) ofArticle 14, Article 15 and Article 21 (4).1.3. The Authority condemns

The Spanish DPA fined an insurance company €24,000 for violating Article 6(1) GDPR due to the processing of personal data without a legal basis. The company

complaint lodged under Article 77 of the GDPR, or proceedings based on Article 78(1) of the GDPR, is not precluded by the GDPR or any other provision of

02/2021 - 14/26 3. Motifs 3.1 Compétence de la Chambre de Résolution des Litiges (Article 2 AVG ; Article 4 WOG) 55. Conformément à l'article 2, paragraphe

the field of public health in accordance with Article 9, paragraph 2, letters h) and i), and paragraph 3; d) for archival purposes in the public interest

2020 [CONFIDENTIAL] 3.3 Report obligation in connection with personal data on AP 3.3.1 Breach of Personal Data On the basis of Article 33, first paragraph

terminated, must be assessed in the light of Article 6 GDPR and not Article 10 GDPR. Article 6(1)(f) GDPR provides a sufficient basis for processing. The

hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SIXTH: On October 13, 2022, DIGI requests the

section 3.3 >>.<< 3.3. Informed manifestation of willThe GDPR reinforces the requirement that consent must be informed. In accordance with theArticle 5 of

(articles 12 and 14 of the GDPR); A breach of his right of access (article 15 of the GDPR); A breach of Article 28 of the GDPR with regard to its status

for the infringement of the confidentiality principle specified at Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, as the defendant agreed to an early and guilty voluntary payment

refer to ‘consent’ in the light of GDPR and thus the condition for a valid consent (Article 7 GDPR) must be met. 3° This consent relates to the purpose

also be subject to the provisions of Article 6.1(e) DSGVO in conjunction with Article 6.1(b) DSGVO. Article 2, 28.2 no. 2 BayDSG without the consent of

held that a lawsuit under Article 79 GDPR regarding the alleged violation of Article 15 GDPR is indeed feasible. Article 79 GDPR is not limited to certain

that Article 36(1) GDPR provides for a duty to consult if two conditions are met. First, a data protection impact assessment under Article 35 GDPR must

for processing on 03/28/2019. Appealed, on appeal RR 354/2019 was resolved on 07/09/2019 being dismissed, highlights, in fact “On May 3, 2019, the affected

meaning of Article 4(7) GDPR and that the controller is requested to delete the data subject’s personal data as the requirements of Article 17(1)(c) GDPR and

violation of Article 15 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, as well as for the alleged infringement of Article 17 of the GDPR, typified in

constituted health data under Article 9(1) and Article 4(15) GDPR but the transfer was nevertheless admissible pursuant to Article 9 GDPR, as the strict requirements

C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es Page 3 3/7 THIRD: Article 12 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, of April 27, 2016, General Data Protection

and the free circulation of these data (hereinafter, GDPR); and in article 47 of the Law Organic 3/2018, of December 5, Protection of Personal Data and

infringement of Article 32.1 of the GDPR typified as a serious infringement in Article 73 f) of the LOPDGDD and in Article 83.4 of the GDPR. For its part

Steuerberatungsgesellschaft mbH (Art 15 Paragraph 1 GDPR) and a copy of this data in accordance with Art 15 Paragraph 3 GDPR cannot be made in view of the

patient data cf. Article 32 GDPR and Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and inadequate internal controls cf. Article 24 GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR. Østfold Hospital

in 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

minutes 3:11:51 and 3:11:57; The video (2) NUM001, between minutes 3:12:06 and 3:12:28; The video (3) NUM002, between the minutes 3:12:54 and 3:13:04; The

and the free circulation of these data (hereinafter, GDPR); and in article 47 of the Law Organic 3/2018, of December 5, Protection of Personal Data and

(2), Article 60, Article 101, Article 101a and Article 103 of the Act of 10 May 2018 on personal data protection (Journal of Laws of 2019, item 1781) and

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 a Luxembourg

According to the Bulgarian DPA, a company violated Article 6(1) GDPR by sending pre-employment arrangements to a government agency while national law only

data under Article 9 GDPR, which can only be lawful if one of the exceptions of Article 9(2) GDPR apply. With respect to Article 9(2)(h) GDPR, the DPC held

interest in the field of public health in accordance with with Article 9(2)(h) and (i) and (3); (d) for archiving purposes in the public interest, for scientific

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

Daten is therefore based on Article 15 (1) (h) GDPR, whereby specifically for information in accordance with Article 15 (1) (h) GDPR, the parameters / input

company was not compliant with Article 13 GDPR. The CNPD held that the controller infringed Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR and decided to: - impose

meaningful information under Article 15(1)(h) GDPR when it does not carry out profiling within the meaning of Article 22 GDPR. On 22 February 2019, a data

agreement under Article 28 (3) of the general data protection regulation, so the agreement cannot be considered as an agreement under Article 28 (3) of the general

and thus failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR and Article 28(1) GDPR. Second, the DPA found that, since the data processing

derogant rule, based on the interpretation of Article 95 GDPR in the line of the Rec (173) GDPR and Article 1(2) and 15a of the ePrivacy Directive. The CNIL

meaning of Article 5(3) and Article 2(f) of Directive 2002/58/EC, as amended by Article 2(5) of Directive 2009/136/EC, in conjunction with Article 2(h) of Directive

processing special categories of data, cf. Article 32(1)(b) GDPR, Article 32(1)(d), Article 24 and Article 35, cf. Article 5. In May 2019, a municipality reported

personal data in that assessment pursuant to Article 15(1) GDPR. However, Article 23(1)(i) GDPR and Article 41 UAVG provide the possibility of a restriction

appellant. This is one of the first cases of an Spanish Court dealing with the GDPR after it become applicable in 2018. Share blogs or news articles here! The

communications, as per Article 21(1) of the Spanish Law on Information Society Services (LSSI), as well as for the infringement of Article 13 of the GDPR. The decision

information under Article 15(1)(h) GDPR (information on the existence of automated decision-making within the meaning of Article 22 GDPR) after their accounts

investigations, in accordance with Article 57(1)(a) and (h) of the RGPD. Moreover, the restricted formation notes that Article 80 of the EPMR provides for the

to persons concerned by the GDPR, including the right to complaint (Article 77 of the GDPR - also recognized in Article 8.3. of the Charter of Rights Decision

rating without a legal basis under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR and for not adhering to the accountability principle as per Article 5(2). The DPA also requires that

with Article 28 (3) point (e). In the event of the use of a data processor, in accordance with the provisions of the agreement pursuant to Article 28 of

and accountability in connection with Article 28(1) GDPR, Article 28(3) GDPR, Article 28(10) GDPR and Article 29 GDPR, with regard to the processing of data

violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and a fine of €100,000 for the violation of Article 37 GDPR. The DPA issued a reprimand for the violations of Article 5(1)(e)

basis for the processing (Article 21(1) GDPR). Finally, the DPA fined the controller €12,000 for a violation of Article 6(1) GDPR due to the lack of a valid

referred to Article 5(1)(a) (principle of lawfulness, fairness and transparency), Article 12(1), Article 7, Article 13 and Article 14 GDPR, the corresponding

LOPD. This resolution warns about the provisions of article 95.3 of the On the other part, article 95.3 of Law 39/2015, of October 1, on Administrative Procedure

required by Article 15(1)(a)-(h) and 15(2) GDPR via an online function. When Spotify provides a copy of personal data under Article 15(3) GDPR it includes

concerning him on the basis of Article 6 paragraph 1 under e and f GDPR. Pursuant to Article 17 paragraph 1 preamble and under c and d GDPR, the data subject has

protected by article 5 par. 1 item a) GDPR, in conjunction with Article 13 GDPR and b) directs a reprimand, according to article 58 par. 2 b) GDPR, to the complained

accountability (Article 5 (2) and 24 (1), (2) GDPR), privacy by design (Article 25 (1) GDPR) and as controller towards its data processors (Article 28 GDPR). Consequently

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

associated with significant cost savings. 3.3. to A) 3.3.1. Applicable Law 3.3.1.1. The relevant provisions of the GDPR Article 4 definitions For the purposes of

Commissioner concerning contraventions of Article 5(2) and Article 35 UK GDPR by the Home Office ENFORCEMENT NOTICE H OME OFFICE 28 February 2024 Enforcement Notice

claim was Article 16 GDPR, as § 12 Bundesmeldegesetz (BMG - Federal Registration Act) clarifies. Then, it held that the legal requirements of Article 16 GDPR

the processing was lawful within the meaning of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. According to Article 88 GDPR, the GDPR is applicable without prejudice to more protective

provided in the above transcribed art 28 of the GDPR. In this regard, add that the obligation provided in article 28.3.h) RGPD, using in the at the beginning

The Directorate failed to provide the documents (required following Article 28(3) GDPR) to demonstrate that the purposes and means of processing were determined

erasure (Article 17 of the GDPR), the right to restriction (Article 18 GDPR), as well as the right of opposition (Article 21 GDPR) 91. Article 17 of the

provided for in article 28(1) of the Regulation. 35. Additionally, the non-existence of an assignment contract, as provided for in article 28(3) of the Regulation

processing as per Article 5(1)(b), nor legal grounds as per Article 6. In sum, the DPA found that NIF had breached Article 5(1)(a), (c) and (f), Article 6, and Article

infringement of article 5.1.c) of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5.a) of the GDPR and 72.1.a) of the LOPDGDD. 2-That in application of article 58.2.c)

with Article 5 paragraph 1 point c, Article 9 paragraph 1, Article 58 paragraph 2 point f, point g and point i and with Article 83 paragraph 2 and 3, Article

hundred and fifty-nine euros). Thus determined by C.H.M. van Altena, chairman, and G.M.H. Hoogvliet and H.C.P. Venema, members, in the presence of S. Langeveld-Mak

also met. 3.3. In the matter 3.3.1. Legal situation: Article 12 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the CouncilArticle 12, of Regulation

the light of Article 13 of the AVG. In this respect, the Inspectorate refers to column 3 of the table below.3 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Privacy policy

articles L.111-1, L.111-2, L.111-3, L.221- 15, L.224-30, L.224-29, L.224-33, L.212-1, L.212-3, L.2141-1, L.211-1, L.232-1, R.631-3, L.621-1, L.621-2, L.621-7

the basis of article 92, 3° of the WOG. 14. The inspection report shall identify potential breaches of Article 5(1). 2 of the AVG, Article 6 of the AVG

pursuant to Article 55 In section 3.3 it was established that Booking is the data controller. In section 3.1, the AP established that, pursuant to Article 56 of

controller (“verlängerter Arm”) (cmp. Article 29 GDPR). If the processing of data is in accordance with Article 6 GDPR, the controller is free to deploy a

then enter a password before gaining access to the computer. 3.3.3 Control of logging 3.3.3.1 Facts The OLVG information security & privacy policy states

powers (Article 58, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the GDPR). The DSB is a supervisory authority within the meaning of Article 51 GDPR Article 51, GDPR (see also

the Foundation. The DPA held that the Foundation violated Article 33(1), Article 34(1) GDPR by failing to notify the DPA of a personal data protection

made to the GDPR, it follows that the "consent" provided for in Article 5, paragraph 3, of the "ePrivacy" directive as transposed in article 82 of the "Informatique

hereinafter: GDPR), OJ L 119, 4 May 2016, p. 1.: Article 4, Article 5 Paragraph 1 Letter c, Article 6, Article 12 Paragraph 3, Article 51 Paragraph 1

adequate information under Article 13 GDPR, and for the processing of personal data in a manner contrary to Article 5(1)(a) of the GDPR. A data subject submitted

infractions of article 48 of Law 9/2014, of May 9, General of Telecommunications (hereinafter LGT), in accordance with the provisions of the article 84.3 of the

required by Article 13 of the GDPR GDPR. The form used violated Article 13 of the GDPR conduct that is subsumi- ble under Article 83(5) of the GDPR, which provides:

implications. 5.3. Relevant practice related to the Personal Data Regulations § 4-3 - «factual need» According to the Personal Data Regulations § 4-3, credit assessment

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 was

in charge and the person in charge, as stipulated in the Article 28, paragraph 3, of the GDPR. In this regard, Guidelines 07/2020 on the concepts of "responsible

fine are set out in Article 83 of the General Data Protection Regulation. contained in Article. In the event of a breach of Article 5 of the General Data

within the meaning of Article 4 no. 2 of the GDPR and the term "transfer" within the meaning of Article 44 et seq. of the GDPR. GDPR had to be differentiated

processing that one of the separate legal bases set out in Article 6 (1) in conjunction with Article 9 (2) of the General Regulation is met. This means that

measures pursuant to Article 58 (2) (d) DSGVO were announced - this error would in any case have been remedied pursuant to Article 45 (1) no. 3 VwVfG by the fact

violation of the Article 12 of the GDPR, in conjunction with Article 17 of the GDPR. V Classification of the infringement of article 12 of the GDPR The aforementioned

controller €5000 for the infringement of Article 28(3) GDPR. Besides that, AEPD fined the controller €2000 for infringing Article 22 of the Spanish Law implementing

V, § 3 BKRG, §§ 2 ff. HmbKrebsRG Article 9 (1) GDPR, Article 6 (1) GDPR, Article 5 (1) in conjunction with Articles 12, 13 and/or Article 14 GDPR and/or

visiting address of the Foundation against the conditions for this in Article 51(3)(a) to (e) of the Hrb 2008, including the condition of a probable threat

under Article 82 UK-GDPR and sections 168 and 169 of the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018. The defendant applied for the claim to be struck out under 3.4(2)(a)

personal data within the meaning of Article 4, opening words and (1) of the AVG. Based on Article 2, paragraph 1 and Article 3, paragraph 2, of the AVG, the

the data subject requested his personal information (Article 15 (1) GDPR and Article 15 (3) GDPR) from the controller. On the same day, the data subject

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

subsequent violations of Article 32(1)(b) GDPR and Article 32(1)(d) GDPR and of the principle of accountability as foreseen in Article 5(2) GDPR read in conjunction

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

461/1969 as amended. : Article 6, Article 51, paragraph one, Article 57, paragraph one, letter h, Article 58, paragraph 2, letter f, GDPR of Regulation (EU)

on the basis of Article 15 GDPR. To that extent, the decision of the Minister for Legal Protection was taken in breach of Article 15 GDPR, and the Court

an eBay-shop for violating Article 6(1) GDPR since they sent newsletters to a customer without consent, Article 12(3) GDPR for not responding to their

pursuant to Article 5(5)(a) of the GDPR. 1(f) of the GDPR. β. They have not implemented appropriate data protection policies to ensure t h a t t h e y a r

the first paragraph. Article 6, Article 7, Article 12, 13 Article 24, Article 24, Article 25, Article 3 Article 28 and Article 32. Regulation (EU) 2016/679

violation of Article 5(2) GPDR since the controller failed to demonstrate compliance with Article 5(1) GDPR and a violation of Article 44 GDPR since the controller

violation of Article 12(3) GDPR and Article 15 GDPR due to a failure to respond to an access request that was submitted around a month after the GDPR became

pursuant to Article 58 (2) (b) of the GDPR. condemns the Applicant for violating Article 5 (1) (a) of the GDPR; (b) and (c), Article 6 and Article 9. (50)

follows from Article 80 of the GDPR that representatives of interests can rely on Article 79, paragraph 2 of the GDPR. Finally, the GDPR is not an exclusive

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

rescission of X's membership, AAEA had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 9(1) GDPR. The Commissioner therefore decided to impose

by virtue of Article 83(2)(e) of the GDPR in order to gauge the illegality of the data controller’s actions. The AEPD, relying on Article 85 of Law 39/2015

related to the GDPR. First, EasyJet told the DPA that they responded to the complainant by 01/04/2022. The DPA pointed out that Article 12(3) GDPR requires controller's

infractions of article 48 of Law 9/2014, of May 9, General Telecommunications (hereinafter LGT), in accordance with the provisions of the article 84.3 of the LGT

on legitimate interests according to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR and that Ziggo had to comply with Article 6(4)(d) GDPR. The Court found that DFW had a legitimate

reprimanded for breach of Article 28(3) GDPR, and the municipality was reprimanded for violations of Article 14 GDPR and Article 12(1) GDPR for failure to take

complied with the conditions set out in Article 6 of the GDPR . In his view, on the basis of Article 5(2) GDPR the controller has an accountability obligation

violates the principle of legality enshrined in article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 a) of the GDPR. SAW In order to establish the administrative

case law of the highest courts on Article 6(1)(e) of the GDPR, Article 9(2)(g) of the GDPR and Article 22 of the GDPR in connection with profiling. It was

result of the violations of article 5.1 a), article 5.2, article 6.1, article 12.1, article 13.1 c) and d) and article 13.2 b) GDPR. 21. On 17 June 2020, the

information and granting it access to personal data in accordance with Article 58 (1)(a) and (e) GDPR. The data subject filed a complaint with the Polish DPA, claiming

volition investigation into CP&A's compliance with Article 9, as well as Article 32 GDPR. Since Article 9 GDPR prohibits the processing of special categories

requirements of Article 5.1.c) of the GDPR and non-compliance with the requirements of article 5.1.e) of the GDPR. 10. On February 28, 2020, the inspected

000 for the breach of Article 6 GDPR, €100,000 for the breach of Article 17 GDPR and €100,000 for the breach of Article 28 GDPR). Share your comments here

be equivalent to a DPIA under Article 35 GDPR. For this reason, the AP held that the controller violated Article 35(1) GDPR. In this, the AP considered it

negligence of the infringement (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR) the impact on basic personal identifiers (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR) Share your comments here! Share

the breach, pursuant to the obligation expressed in Article 34 GDPR, in conjunction with Article 12 GDPR. Based on this assessment, the DPA issued an administrative

arguing that it wasn’t a controller within the definition set out under Article 2(d) Directive 95/46 and that NRW did not have legal standing to bring a

scope of Article 9(1) GDPR. Since Article 9 GDPR was not applicable, the DPA examined the lawfulness of the processing under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR which was

dissuasive" as per Article 83(1). In addition to a breach of Article 6(1)(f), the lack of organisational measures pursuant to Article 5(2) was weighted

Violating Article 28(3) GDPR for not having a data processing agreement in place; Violating Article 32(2) GDPR, cf. Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR

pursuant to Art. 13(1)(c) GDPR, (3) Insofar as the application refers to Article 7 (3) sentence 3 and Article 21 (4) of the GDPR, this is sufficient, as

deletion request, the Court examined Article 6(1)(f), Article 17, and Article 21 GDPR. The second sentence of Article 21(1) stipulates that the controller

in response to the LPBCFT before the TGSS. III Article 6.1 of the GDPR According to article 6 of the GDPR “Legitimacy of processing: 1. Treatment will only

transferred the claimed on January 28, 2021, in accordance with the provisions in article 65.4 of the Organic Law 3/2018, of December 5, on Data Protection

of the GDPR. 17. By Article 57(1) of the GDPR, it is the Commissioner's task to monitor and enforce the application of the GDPR. 18. By Article 58(2)(d)

B28905784, for an infringement of the article 5.1.d) of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5 a) of the GDPR, with a fine of 10,000 euros (ten honey

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

and the assessment of a removal request - on the basis of (Article 21(1) of) the AVG. 3.5 Grief 3 argued that the repossession, which gave rise to the registration

Clause 1 GDPR) to the "How" (Article 15 Paragraph 1 Clause 2 lit. a-h, Paragraph 2 GDPR) to the "What" ( Art 15 para. 1 clause 2, para. 3 GDPR). If the

on August 3, 2022. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/28 SECOND: In accordance with article 65.4 of Organic Law 3/2018, of 5

purposes of Article 4(16) GDPR." Consequently, the DPA concluded that the cooperation mechanism and procedure set out in Article 56(1) GDPR and Article 60 GDPR

the GDPR and DPA 2018. They are obliged by Article 5(2) of the GDPR to adhere to the data processing principle set out in Article 5(1). 8. Article 5(1)(f)

interpretation of the GDPR. Second, the court argued with the drafting history of the GDPR which connects Article 15(3) GDPR to Article 20(1) GDPR, showing that

that Article 3, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7 paragraph 1, Article 8, Article 9 paragraph 1 subparagraph 2, Article 9 paragraphs 3 and 4, Article 10 paragraph

under Article 3 GDPR was also fulfilled, as the controller had an official seat in Vienna. In general, the material scope under Article 2(1) GDPR would

Federation, B.B.B., citing article 9.3 of the GDPR. 10) Regarding economic sanctions, for the infringement of article 6.1 of the GDPR, contemplated in the provisions

body within the meaning of Article 83(7) GDPR. In interpreting what amounts to a public authority or body under Article 83(7) GDPR, the NSS held that such

controller violated Article 33(1) GDPR by not notifying the DPA of the data breach. Consequently, the DPA issued a fine of approximately €3,492 (16,000 PLN)

the EU Article 28: Processor of processing (regulations) Article 28.3: Arrangements of a contract (or other legal act) with processors Article 29: Processing

under Article 15(3) of the GDPR from Zilveren Kruis, Stichting Philadelphia Zorg, Stichting Cordaan and another party. On 30 August 2018 and 28 September

accounts of three of its former employees in violation of Article 5(1) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. GEICO S.p.A., the controller, was the employer of the three

thereby violating Article 12 (1) and Article 14 (1) points a) and c), as well as Article 14 (2) b), c) and e) of the GDPR points. 3.5. Customer 1's data

himself, this principle is elaborated in Article 14 of the GDPR. It follows from Article 14(1)(d) of the GDPR that the controller must inform the data

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

infractions of article 48 of Law 9/2014, of May 9, General Telecommunications (hereinafter LGT), in accordance with the provisions of the article 84.3 of the LGT

the UK GDPR and the DPA. They are obliged by Article 5(2) to adhere to the data processing principles set out in Article 5(1) of the UK GDPR. Article 5(2)

conditions provided for in Article 6.1.e) are met by the species. Under Article 6.3.b) and recital 45 of the GDPR, processing based on Article 6.1.e) must meet two

information under Article 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

claimed party, for the alleged violation of article 32 of the RGPD and article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD. FIFTH: The initiation

per Article 57(1)(a) GDPR, Article 57(1)(h) GDPR, cf. Article 58(1)(a) GDPR, Article 58(1)(b) GDPR, Article 58(1)(e) GDPR and Article 58(1)(f) GDPR. The

processing to be unlawful. The processing violated Article 7(2) GDPR, Article 7(4) GDPR and Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. The controller was fined 2,000,000 HUF (approx

above aspects may constitute a breach of Article 13 of the GDPR. Article 13 of the GDPR. In this regard, Article 72.1.h) of the LOPDGDD, considers as very serious

under the GDPR. 14. By Article 57(1) of the GDPR, it is the Commissioner'task to monitor and enforce the application of the GDPR. 15. By Article 58(2)(d)of

legislative measure that serves one of the objectives listed in Article 23, namely Article 23(1)(i) GDPR. After all, the Court of first instance notes, “compliance

Vodafone processed personal data without a legal basis according to Article 6(1) GDPR. The complainant has been a victim of identity theft with the data

has not violated the article 15 of the GDPR, infringement typified in article 83.5 a) of the GDPR. IV. Secondly, article 32 of the GDPR "Security of treatment"

under Article 3 GDPR was also fulfilled, as the controller had an official seat in Vienna. Moreover, the material scope under Article 2(1) GDPR also applied

a) The scope of Article 15(1)(h) AVG 3.28 The Court will first address the scope and conditions of application of Article 15 (1) (h) AVG, as this provision

services pursuant to Article 123(3) of the Code. The Italian DPA observed that the definition of 'traffic data' proposed by Article 121 Code would be too

Section 3 (3) sentence 1 CoronaVO Restaurants. The data must be deleted by the operator four weeks after being collected (§ 2 Para. 3 Sentence 3 CoronaVO

were initiated, based on Article 63 and Article 64 LPACAP and an infringement of Article 6(1) GDPR typified in Article 83(5) GDPR. After the proceedings

drives and that this obligation was not contrary to Article 6(1) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, a controller may use the legal basis of legitimate

in the GDPR and the DPA. They are obliged by Article 5(2) to adhere to the data processing principles set out in Article 5(1) of the GDPR. Article 5(2) makes

Office (BKR) with a debt arrangement (SR). On 28 May 2020, the applicant requested, with reference to Article 21 of the General Data Protection Regulation

Authorities to receive the information as referred to in Article 15, paragraph 1 a to h GDPR." 3.1. The Division agrees with the judgment of the District

for the purposes of Article 26 GDPR. It held that their cookie practices were (i) in violation of Article 6(1)(a) GDPR, and (ii) Article 11.7a of the Dutch

set out by Article 12(4) GDPR. The DPA ordered the controller to comply with the access request pursuant Article 58(2)(c) GDPR and Article 95(1)(5) LCA

under Article 10 ECHR and Article 11 of the Charter. The DPA also added the GDPR provided an exception to its own, specifically Article 17(3)(a) GDPR, ⁣ which

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

defendant. 4.3. The request to delete the BKR registration must be regarded as a request under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Article 34 of the

to in Articles 15 to 22 of the GDPR. This follows from Article 34 of the GDPR Implementation Act. Article 21 of the GDPR is entitled to object. That right

between the parties). With regard to Article 99(2) GDPR, the Court already expressed doubts as to whether Article 82 GDPR is applicable to the deletion/blocking

democratic society as required under Article 23(1)(j) GDPR. Moreover, the exception provided for under Article 6(4) GDPR which allows processing for different

do- as established in article 2.2 of the RGPD and article 2.2.a) of the LO- PDGDD, the following should be noted: it says to article 2.2 of the RGPD: "two

time tracking system, due to a lack of compatibility with Article 7(4) and Article 35(9) of GDPR. KEO PLC decided to upgrade its ERP system, whose upgrade

met. 3.3. to part A): 3.3.1 Legal situation: The contested authority based its decision on the following legal bases: Article 12, Article 15, Article 57(1)(f)

incomplete data provision. 3.3. The request under I (iii) is based on Articles 15, paragraph 1, opening words and under h and 22 GDPR (automated decision-making

GDPR obliges the controller to demonstrate compliance with GDPR provisions, this includes obtaining proof of consent in line with Article 7(1) GDPR. Especially

registers removed is rejected. 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, [applicant] can rely on Article 21 of the GDPR. Article 21 GDPR gives a data subject the right to object

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

violated Article 14(1) and (2) GDPR. Because it failed to provide clear and transparent information, the controller also violated Article 12(1) GDPR. The DPA

information. b.) On the right to a copy (Article 15, Paragraph 3, GDPR)b.) On the right to a copy (Article 15, Paragraph 3, GDPR) The right to a copy of data in

that justify it. This monitoring should rely on a legal basis under Article 6 GDPR. In this case, the DPA assessed whether the legitimate interest could

for conducting risk assessments. Both Article 24 and Article 32 GDPR impose such an obligation. Considering the individual case a thorough assessment would

personal data according to Article 4(1) GDPR, and that the data subject had a right to erasure pursuant to Article 17(1)(d) GDPR. According to the OLG Dresden

act, which must contain certain prescribed components (Article 28 of the General Regulation). Article 13 (1) of the General Regulation provides that where

the basis of Article 15. of the Regulation, cf. further discussion in Chapter II.3.3. below, which is laid down in the 5th paragraph. Article 12 her. That

chosen method of provision meets the purpose of Article 15(3) of the GDPR.11 Judgment of the court 11.3. This ground of appeal fails. In the primary decision

access to personal data relating to him under the AVG and that, in view of Article 12(3) of the AVG, the opponent should in principle have decided within one

data processing [Article 83 (2) (d) GDPR]; the personal data collected are also special categories of personal data [Article 83 GDPR. Article 2 (2) (g)]; -

help him, since it is contrary to the text of the aforementioned Article 46, paragraph 3, opening words and letter b [addition of the court : of the 1964

fairness and transparency under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, as well as the data subject’s right to information under Articles 12 and 13 GDPR, and issued a fine of €10

transparency from Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. Therefore, the controller violated the principle of accountability provided by Article 5(2) and 24 GDPR for the failure

issued a warning to a hospital group for non-compliance of Article 32 GDPR and Article 24 GDPR, as the hospital group had failed to implement the appropriate

for by Article 51 of the GDPR. 13. By Article 57(1) of the GDPR, it is the Commissioner's task to monitor and enforce the application of the GDPR. 14. By

the scope of Article 22 and therefore Article 15(1)(h) applies. They also claimed to have a right to data portability under Article 20(1) GDPR and that information

dossiers from the Finanzamt Neu-Ulm on 28.10.2019. The BayLfSt received a request to access under Article 15(1) GDPR on 07.11.2019. The data subject wanted

for an infraction of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 a) of the RGPD, and for the purposes of prescription in article 72.1.a) of the LOPDGDD

(1) (3) of the Personal Data Act (523/1999). 3. The Data Protection Regulation is the law directly applicable in the Member States. However, Article 6 (2)

report under Article 33 GDPR and the obligation to provide information under Article 34 GDPR does not fall within the scope of Article 82 GDPR (see above)

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

to the GDPR pursuant to Article 3(1) of the GDPR, so no EU representative is required in accordance with compliance with article 27 of the GDPR.” It does

and Section 2 of the German Civil Code in conjunction with Article 6 (1) GDPR and Article 17 GDPR, the plaintiff is also not entitled to an injunctive relief

to comply with the request (Article 12(3) GDPR) or not (Article 12(4) GDPR). Without addressing a potential breach of the GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller

requirements of the first paragraph. Article 11 of the Act, cf. Paragraph 2 Article 9 Regulation. According to point 3 (b). Article 3 the law is health information

safety for the processing of personal data under Article 32 GDPR, Article 24, Article 5(1)(f) and Article 5(2), as well as § 26(1) of the Personal Data Act

processing lack any applicable conditions found in Article 9(2) GDPR and was found in breach of Article 5(2) GDPR. Additionally, the Garante reiterated that the

6(1)(b), 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(c) GDPR? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) deemed itself competent under Article 58(2) GDPR in conjunction with Article 47 of the Spanish Data

under Article 5(1)(e) GDPR by not taking any measures to ensure that the recordings were deleted after set limitation of 3 days, 3) Article 12(1) GDPR by

use of your data 21 GDPR, he did not explain to what extent the Data processing based on Article 6 Paragraph 1 Letter f of the GDPR is nevertheless not

are subject to the GDPR pursuant to Article 3(2)(a) of this Regulation. B. On the competence of the CNIL 22. Article 55(1) of the GDPR provides that "each

data electronically pursuant to Article 15(3)(3) GDPR, the controller generally has discretion under Article 12(1)(2) GDPR as to the form in which they provide

with the applicable data protection law, and in particular with Article 14 of the GDPR. In Iceland, the processing of personal data relating to the creditworthiness

data that was exposed fell within Article 9(1) GDPR. With this in mind, the Spanish DPA found a violation of Article 32 GDPR since the lack of security measures

430 and 432(6)). 6. Consent is defined in Article 4(11) the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 ("GDPR") as "any freely given, specific, informed

Court considered that pursuant to Article 12(3) GDPR, data controllers must provide data subjects with information on Article 15 to 22 requests without delay

entitled to a claim under Article 82 (1) GDPR, which he could also base on Article 823 (1) BGB in conjunction with Article 2 (1) and Article 1 (1) GG. The defendant

under the GDPR and to keep within the legal timeframes; and also giving due regard to the circumstances contemplated under Article 83.2 of the GDPR and taking

the social and health authority of a city to had breached Article 6 GDPR and Article 10 GDPR by requesting data subjects to provide it with personal data

personal data within the meaning of Article 4(1) GDPR and thus cannot be object of an access request under Article 15(3) GDPR. Making reference to CJEU case