Search results

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

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)

such as profiling (see also Article 4(4) GDPR); Restriction (marking for limited further processing, see also Article 4(3) GDPR), such as deactivation of

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

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

infringement committed to Article 12.3 and 12.4 GDPR as well as to Articles 11 §3, 11/1 § 3, 11/2§3 and 11/3 §3 of the law of 3 August 2012 . 2.3.2. With regard to

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

consent under Article 7(3), object under Article 21 GDPR or if the processing is in fact compliant with the principles of Article 5(1) GDPR. Simply listing

a "filing system" within the meaning of Article 4(6) GDPR. See also Article 2(1) GDPR on the scope of the GDPR when it comes to non-automated filing systems

evaluating the effectiveness of security measures (Article 32(1)(d) GDPR). According to Article 4(5) GDPR, "pseudonymisation" means the processing of personal

listed in Article 83(4), (5) and (6) GDPR. This specifically refers to violations of Articles 8, 11, 25 to 39, 41(4), 42, 43 of the GDPR (paragraph 4), Articles

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

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

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)

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

Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 25 GDPR, p. 577 (Oxford University Press 2020). EDPB, 'Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection

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)

performance. Article 7 GDPR regulates the "conditions for consent". It specifies the definition of consent set out in Article 4(11) GDPR and, by integrating

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

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

meaning of Article 4(7) and (8) GDPR can be liable for compensation. A claim for damages first requires an infringement of the GDPR. Article 82 GDPR does not

(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)

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

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

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

GDPR are Article 4(7) GDPR (definition of controller), Article 4(8) GDPR (definition of processor), Article 4(16) GDPR (definition of main establishment)

not directly mentioned by Article 33(3)(b)-(d) GDPR could be shared as additional information by the controller Article 34(3) GDPR lists three exemptions

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

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

and interpretation as in Article 22(3) GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 22 GDPR Article 20 of GDPR proposal, COM(2012) 11 final

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

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)

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

right to data protection. Article 51 GDPR is closely connected to Article 4(21) (definition of SA), Article 52 (independence), Article 53 (General conditions

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

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

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

DS-GVO 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

64(2) GDPR). The remaining paragraphs of Article 64(3)-(8) GDPR lay down substantive rules and a detailed procedure for the EDPB’s opinions. Article 64(1) GDPR

lead SA (“LSA”) (Article 65(1)(b) GDPR), and where a SA is not following an opinion of the EDPB (Article 6(1)(c) GDPR). Article 65(1)(a) GDPR addresses the

GDPR. In contrast, Article 66(3) refers to “any supervisory authority” (Article 4(21) GDPR) and allows it to request an urgent opinion or an urgent binding

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

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

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

notification GDPR articles 51(4), 85(3), 88(3) (available here) (accessed 30 April 2021). Ireland notification GDPR articles 51(4), 84(2), 85(3), 88(3), 90(2)

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

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

clear from the wording of Article 41(1) GDPR. Article 41(1) GDPR does not define accreditation. Nonetheless, Article 41(2) GDPR provides a criterion against

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

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

Member State in relation to damage referred to in Article 62(4) GDPR. According to Article 62(7) GDPR, if the lead SA does not invite the SA to take part

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

occupation. For example, Article 52(2) GDPR requires SA members to remain free from external influence and Article 52(3) GDPR entails a prohibition of

decisions pursuant to Article 65 GDPR (Article 70(1)(t) GDPR). Article 68 GDPR is the first of nine Articles (Articles 68-76 GDPR) governing the EDPB set

in Category:Article 3 GDPR EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November 2019 (Version 2.1), p. 4 (available here)

burdens. This reading of Article 31 GDPR is supported by the language of Article 83(4)(a) GDPR which categorises Article 31 GDPR as an 'obligation' of the

incompatible with the office. Article 52(4) GDPR and Article 52(6) GDPR establish the framework for SAs financial governance. Article 52(4) GDPR stipulates that SAs

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

with processing within the scope of the GDPR. Part 2 deals with processing outside of the scope of the GDPR. Part 3 deals with processing by competent authorities

exercise on their behalf all rights foreseen under Articles 77 and 78 GDPR and Article 20 of L. 4624/2019. The mandate shall be given with a specific written

limit the application of the GDPR. You can find further details about the territorial scope in Article 3 GDPR. According to Article 1(2), the Regulation generally

objections pursuant to Article 92(5) GDPR. Article 92(5) GDPR imposes a further condition for the delegation of power, in line with Article 290(2)(b) TFEU. A

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

other DPAs concerned. The BCR Lead the submits, following Article 64(1) GDPR and Article 64(4) GDPR, a draft decision to the EDPB. The EDPB, in turn, issues

dispute resolution under Article 65(3)(1) GDPR and for consistency decisions in the urgency procedure under Article 66(4) GDPR is necessary, as these are

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

Garante. For example, Article 3 reiterates the general principles of fairness and transparency of the proceeding before the DPA. Article 12 ensures a right

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

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

relevance of Article 29 GDPR were rooted in the fact that Article 28(3)(b) GDPR already seems to cover much of the scope of Article 29 GDPR. More specifically

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)

Buchner, DS-GVO 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

please refer to Article 19 GDPR. If the controller declines to rectify the data, they must provide reasons for their decision (Article 12(4) GDPR). The data

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

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

controller (as defined under Article 4(7) GDPR) and a processor (as defined under Article 4(8) GDPR). As noted above, Article 79 GDPR imposes a two-stage cumulative

simple majority principle under Article 72(1) GDPR would have applied regardless of Article 73(1) GDPR. In addition, the GDPR explicitly legislates for a simple

disclosed to per Article 4(9) GDPR. Article 19 does not establish any specific time requirement for notification. However, since the purpose of Article 19 is to

shall apply from 25 May 2018. There is no relevant recital for Article 99 GDPR. Article 99 GDPR sets out the dates of the Regulation's entry into force and

Regulation (GDPR), Article 76 GDPR, p. 1111-1112 (Oxford University Press 2020). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article

provisions such as Article 30(4) for the record of processing or Article 40(11) for the register of approved codes of conduct, Article 26 does not explicitly

Protection Supervisor, including decisions under Article 63(3), shall be brought before the Court of Justice. 3.   The Court of Justice shall have unlimited

procedural aspects of the use of GDPR and other aspects which the GDPR leaves for definition to the member states (for ex. Art. 6(3), some aspects of Art. 9(2)

explicit wording of Article 81 GDPR does not limit its application to proceedings instigated either under Article 78 GDPR or Article 79 GDPR. Secondly, the

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

Category:Article 67 GDPR See EDPB, State of Play - IMI for GDPR purposes, 27 June 2018 (available here). See EDPB, 2019 Annual Report, Section 4.3.1 (available

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)

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

Regulation. Noting that a broader reading of Article 98 GDPR is supported by the wording of Article 2(3) GDPR, which provides that: 'For the processing of

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

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)

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)

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 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

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

of such processing (see Article 5(1)(b) GDPR), the requirement to have a legitimate basis laid down by law (see Article 6(1) GDPR), the right to access and

to in Article 46(2)(d) GDPR, contractual clauses referred to in Article 46(3)(a) GDPR, or binding corporate rules within the meaning of Article 47 GDPR

protected by Article 96 GDPR if it is found to be incompatible with other GDPR provisions. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 96 GDPR It follows

process them. This was already the case under Article 8(7) of the DPD, the precursor of Article 87 GDPR. In many Member States, the processing of NIN and

subject to the GDPR or, in cases where they are not established in the EU, act within the material and territorial scope of the GDPR. Article 48 GDPR refers to

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

Press 2020). Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. CJEU

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

Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University Press 2020). Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article

organisation-fined-for-gdpr-rule-breach-1.4255692?mode=amp https://www.irishlegal.com/article/tusla-fined-40-000-in-second-gdpr-breach https://www.dataprotection

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

motion. Its powers are described under Article 8 of the law "Informatique et Libertés". Under Article R311-1(4) of the French code of administrative justice

to § 14(1)(1)(6) BDSG the BfDI is responsible for complaints under Article 77 GDPR. The BfDI has to inform the complainant about the ongoing procedure

website controller qualifies as controller (Article 4(7) GDPR) and Google LLC as processor (Article 4(8) GDPR) for data processing in connection with Google

at/dam/jcr:ee7b155a-0a1f-4d00-98e9-902314c7022d/Datenschutzbericht%202022.pdf Report: Europe’s governments are failing the GDPR by Brave, page 6 - https://brave

Spain the GDPR is developed by the Ley Orgánica 3/2018 de Protección de Datos Personales y garantía de los derechos digitales (LOPDGDD). Article 7.2 LOPDGDD

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

what purpose, etc. ........4 1.3.2 Recipient of the data ............................................. .....................4 1.3.3 The data processed in the

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

Protection Ordinance Article 5, paragraph Article 5 (2) 1, letter c and letter f., Article 5, paragraph Article 6 (1) (a) Article 32 (1), (1), (33) 1 and

Paragraph 24 of Schedule 2 states that the GDPR provisions Article 13(1) to (3), Article 14(1) to (4) and Article 15(1) to (3) do not apply to personal data consisting

protection regulation's article 5, subsection 2, cf. Article 5, subsection 1, letter a, Article 24, cf. Article 28, subsection 1, Article 35, subsection 1, as

pursuant to Article 5(2) GDPR in conjunction with Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. Failure to demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with the GDPR The DPA

the age of consent under GDPR is kept, namely 16 (art. 8.1 GDPR). See Article 7 of the national implementing law. See Article 5 of the national implementing

personal data under Article 9(1) GDPR. Their processing would require the data subjects' explicit consent under Article 9(2)(a) GDPR and § 151(4) GewO, ordered

administrative fine for the infringement of Article 6(1) or Article 6(1)(b) GDPR meet the requirements of Article 4(24) GDPR. 504. The EDPB decides that the relevant

of personal data of data subjects guaranteed by Article 44 GDPR and consequently breached Article 44 GDPR. The DPA issued a fine of 300,000 SEK (approx.

............. ......................4 1.3.1 Who has implemented the Tool and for what purpose, etc. ........4 1.3.2 Recipient of the data ............

...............3 1.3 What Coop has stated............................................... ........................................4 1.3.1 Who has implemented

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

the documents or files containing their personal data under Article 15(3) GDPR and Article 12 of the ePrivacy Directive. However, there is a right to a

age of consent in Sweden is 13 years following § 4 of the Data Protection Act. Under Chapter 3 § 3 number 3 there is a general provision opening up for processing

26/2021 - 4/4 This interim decision can be appealed within 30 days of its notification registered with the Marktenhof (article 108, § 1, of the law of 3 December

violation of Article 6(1) GDPR; 2. Did not provide the complainant with enough information prior to the processing, in violation of Article 13 GDPR; 3. Processed

protection within the meaning of Article 45 of the GDPR and without appropriate safeguards within the meaning of Article 46 of the GDPR. Furthermore, the plaintiff

categories of personal data, cf. GDPR article 9 no. 1, cf. article 4 no. 15. The medical list disputes this. Article 4 (15) reads as follows: "For the purposes

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

Infringement of Article 6 and 9 GDPR qualifies for the maximum amount for administrative fines as set out in Article 83(5) GDPR: 20,000,000 € or 4% of the total

defendant within the meaning of Article 4 of the GDPR. The defendant is therefore a controller within the meaning of Art. 4 No. 7 GDPR. b. 44 The Senate is convinced

interests under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. On the erasure obligations under Article 17 GDPR, the CJEU held that under Article 17(1)(d) GDPR SCHUFA will be under

reading first sentence of Article 15(3), in conjunction with Article 12(5) of the GDPR under Article 23(1)(i) GDPR. (judgment of 4 May 2023, Österreichische

various GDPR violations (including the principles of legality, transparency and fairness, minimisation and security among others). In total, 4 complaints

under Article 32 GDPR? 4) Does Article 82(3) GDPR allow the controller to be exempt from liability for damages if the data breach as defined by 4(12) GDPR

Protection Act 2019 sets exceptions in Article 9(1) GDPR, Article 15 GDPR, Article 16 GDPR, Article 18 GDPR and Article 21 GDPR for scientific or historical research

council in Greece to cease their processing activities, under Article 58(2) GDPR and Article 15(8) of Law 4624/2019, because of an unresolved data breach

many waivers from GDPR for research purposes under Article 89 GDPR. It is questionable of the law is constitutional and in line with GDPR. § 151 of the Austrian

its Article 35, that the concept of personal data and the possibilities for processing and protection will be defined by the law. The same article reaffirms

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

(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)

the meaning of Article 4(7) GDPR. Furthermore, the erasure or destruction of personal data is a form of processing based on Article 4(2) GDPR. The DPA has

parent's request, thus violating Article 15(1) and (4) GDPR as well as the principle of accountability pursuant to Article 5(2) GDPR. The complainant requested

registered letter in violation of article 15 (1) cond. 12 par. 2, 3 and 4 GDPR and c) 30,000 euros for violation of Article 25 (1) GDPR because it did not in practice

competition law, such as the GDPR. It followed, that the CJEU held that in accordance with Article 51 GDPR and Article 4(3) TEU a national competition authority

erasure provided for in Article 17 GDPR? b)      that person is not entitled to a right of objection as referred to in Article 21 GDPR? 3.      If the answer

the reasons for the delay, in breach of the provisions of Article 12 (3) and (4) of the GDPR.The same infringement, namely the late reply of the PPC as

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

such a fulfilment by Article 12(3) & (4) GDPR. For this reason, an administrative fine of 1000 EUR was imposed (Article 83(5)b GDPR). Share your comments

the documents or files containing their personal data under Article 15(3) GDPR and Article 12 of the ePrivacy Directive. However, there is a right to a

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

monitor the functioning of decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) or Article 26(4) of Directive 95/46/EC. In its adequacy decisions, the Commission

the data subject's consent in Article 4(11), and the basic principle of legality, reasonableness and transparency in Article 5(1)(a). Furthermore, Datatilsynet

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

the inspected with section 4 of chapter 4 of the GDPR. 3. […] the inspectorate [is active in the field of transport] […]. 4. The controlled has approximately

b) of paragraph 3, all of article 35, and paragraph a) of paragraph 4 of article 83, all GDPR, with a fine of up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of annual turnover

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

therefore sufficient legal reasons. c) A right to information from § 3 para. 3 and 4 VVG is also ruled out. This only refers to missing come or destroyed

in Article 23 GDPR. Restrictions on the right to information under Art. 15 GDPR result in particular from the express provision in Art. 15 (4) GDPR that

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

under Article 77 GDPR was very clear and limited in scope. However, the DSB went on to assert a violation of Article 12 GDPR and Article 15(1)(h) GDPR, acting

explanatory statement of the law, Article 10 defines the Authority’s competence in compliance with Article 55 GDPR.Article 55 GDPR provides for a restriction

meaning of article 4.19 of the GDPR – (article 13.1. c) of the GDPR) and does not mention the data retention periods personal data processed (article 13.2.

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

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,

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

even pseudonymised data (Art. 4 Para. 5 GDPR) from the term personal data are recorded in accordance with Art. 4 Para. 1 GDPR. It is undeniable that the MB

force: "According to Article 16 sentence 1 GDPR, every data subject has the right to request the controller (see Article 4(7) GDPR) to correct incorrect

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

period allotted to it to do so (Article 15.1 combined with Article 12.3. of GDPR as well as Article 12.2. of the GDPR (obligation to facilitate the exercise

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

it should have under Article 60 GDPR - Article 61(8) GDPR applied, which meant that the urgent need to act under Article 66(1) GDPR was presumed to be met

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

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

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

the explanatory memorandum to the UAVG, 3 state that Article 78 of the GDPR is a term as referred to in Article 4:13, first paragraph, of the Awb. The fact

accordance with article 11 par.1 Law 3471/2006, as applicable, the prior consent of the data subject, without prejudice to paragraph 3 of the same article, as applicable

address from my list of recipients, in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 GDPR. 4) He proceeded to remove the recipient’s e-mail address from the list

GDPR, Article 9 GDPR, Article 10 GDPR, Article 30 GDPR and Article 34 GDPR, as well as the provision of the PDPA governing processing of personal data

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 in

conditions of Article 6 (1) of the GDPR. This follows both from Article 21(1)(1)(2) of the GDPR, which refers to Article 6(1)(1)(e) and (f) of the GDPR as a possible

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

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, are a Personal data and its protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In the article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

did not react either. GDPR applicable? (Article 3(2) GDPR) The DPA held that the GDPR was applicable pursuant of Article 3(2) GDPR. Because the controller

constitute personal data under Article 4(1) GDPR? If so, do they qualify as special categories of personal data under Article 9 GDPR? Is the defendant obliged

controller €3,940,000 for the violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR. The AEPD considered that the fine was proportional, since the GDPR establishes

ends and means of such activity, by virtue of article 4.7 of the GDPR. Article 4 section 12 of the GDPR broadly defines “violations of security of personal

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

April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation - GDPR), in conjunction with Article 3, Article 4(2) and Article 6(1)(b), all of which are applicable to the

compliance with the principles of Article 5 (1) GDPR. 4. As, in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 (c) (d).1 GDPR is personal data “any information

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

or for statistical purposes is not 3 Letter of the Respondent to the Litigation Chamber of July 6, 2020. 4 Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

accordance with article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 The GDPR defines

data concerning those other persons. On Article 12(4) GDPR: the defendant was found in breach of Article 12(4) GDPR for not mentioning the possibility to

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

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

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

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

according to Article 9(2)(a) GDPR. On the basis of the information gathered, the DPA held that the controller had violated Article 9 GDPR. As a result

default (Art. 25 GDPR), integrity and confidentiality (Art. 5.1.f GDPR), as well as security ofprocessing(Art. 32GDPR)......101 B.4.4. - Additional alleged

several paragraphs of Article 83 of the GDPR, as further summarised below. Fining of the ‘gravest infringement’. Article 83(3) GDPR provides that “[i]f a

least one of the conditions set out in Article 6(1) GDPR? On the topic of non-material damages 4) Does Article 82(1) GDPR have a specific or general preventive

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)

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

the alleged violation of article 5.1.f) of the GDPR and article 32 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 and 83.4 of the GDPR. The initiation agreement

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

controller €80,000: €50,000 for the violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and €30,000 for the violation of Article 32 GDPR. The original fine of €80,000 was reduced

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

with article 4.1 of the RGPD, is a personal data. nal and its protection, therefore, is the subject of said regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

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

very serious in article 72.1. e) from the LOPDGDD, with 10,000 euros. -article 13 of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5 b) of the GDPR, and for the

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

following the mandatory legal requirements to do so, violating Article 6(1) and Article 13 GDPR. A resident has installed, without the authorization of the

none of the exceptions in Article 82 of the Data Protection Act were applicable, and Apple had to obtain consent (Article 4(11) GDPR) before using the identifiers

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)

all" button be considered a breach of GDPR Article 4(11) and Article 7, read in conjunction with GDPR Article 5(3) -Privacy while the data controller gives

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

(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

basis under Article 6(1) GDPR. In light of this, the DPA issued a fine of €70,000 to másLUZ Energía (SIE) by virtue of Article 83(5) GDPR for unlawful

2016/679 and article 11toun.3471 / 2006, according to article 58par.2 of the GCP in in combination with article 83 par. 5 of the GCC, and with article 21 par

area (Document Annex). mental I). SECOND: In accordance with article 65.4 of Organic Law 3/2018, of 5 December, Protection of Personal Data and guarantee

and Article of 11Law No. 3471/2006, in accordance with Article 13(58i2) of the GDPR in conjunction with Article 83(1)(a) of the GDPR. 5 of the GDPR, and

Supervision: Article 6(1)(f), legitimate interest. For the special category personal data: About diagnosis: Article 6(1)(a), cf. Article 9(2)(a), consent

according to article 4.1 of the GDPR, is data personnel and their protection, therefore, is the subject of said Regulation. In article 4.2 of the GDPR defines

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

AEPD found that the Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSC-PSOE) violated Article 21 GDPR due to unsolicited political propaganda sent after the data subject

considering that it has violated the provisions of Article 17 of the GDPR and Article 21 of the GDPR and urge GLOBAL CAPITAL GROUP SPAIN, S.L. with NIF

this regulation in accordance with Article 57 (1) (a) GDPR and which has the powers in accordance with Article 58 GDPR. For this reason alone, there was

seriously impair the achievement of purposes pursuant to Article 89(1) GDPR. In principle, Article 89(3) GDPR contains an opening clause. This provision was also

communication service. Therefore, TikTok had to obtain valid consent (Article 4(11) GDPR) from users before using the identifiers. The DPA stated that it should

to the powers provided for in Article 51(1) GDPR and those conferred by Article 58(2)(b) and (d) of that regulation? (3) Must the independence of the supervisory

coverage of the image of the third party shall not be required.” 4. As follows from Article 12 (4) of Law 2472/1997, the controller was required to respond to

right of freedom of expression and information within the meaning of Article 17(3)(a) GDPR. The controller also stated that there were compelling legitimate

the GDPR. In light of this, the Court agreed with the DPA that the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article

2, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3, 59.3

right to erasure (“right to be forgotten”) of Article 17 GDPR and Article 19 of Regulation 2018/1725. Under GDPR, such prolonged and unrestricted data retention

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

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

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)

included within the framework of data protection. Therefore, Article 16 GDPR cannot be applied. Article 16 refers to inaccurate personal data, not to the rectification

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

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

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 – or a public

democratic legitimation necessary under Article 23(1) second sentence in conjunction with Article 20(1) and (2) and Article 79(3) of the Basic Law. Since 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

right to privacy. Health data are sensitive data covered by Article 9 GDPR. According to Article 137 of the Italian Data Protection Code, health data can

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

cf. GDPR Art. 34, 3 (b), it is our opinion that Namely and Intervare are not required to notify the data subjects pursuant to the GDPR art. 34, 1. 3. Justification

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

was outdated and was no longer of importance to society. Pursuant to Article 17(1) GDPR, the data subject had requested Google LLC (the controller) to remove

this from happening, in violation with Article 24(1), Article 24(2), and Article 25(1) GDPR. According to Article 24(4) of the Finish Data Protection Act,

with the principles of article 5 par. 1 GDPR. It is no coincidence that the GDPR includes accountability (see Article 5 para. 2 GDPR) in the regulation of

(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

under Article 15 GDPR." The DPA rejected the request for review. Genealogical research on a family surname did not fall within the scope of Article 15 GDPR

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

governed by the basic principle of GDPR, the principle of transparency (relevant Articles 12-14 of the GDPR). 4. The GDPR introduces the principle of accountability

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

comprehensible character, within the meaning of Article 12 of the GDPR, of the information provided for in Article 13 of the Regulation must be assessed. The

powers under Article 58(2) GDPR and impose on the respondent the responsibility to restore the fulfilment of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and of Article 5(1)(b-f)

60 of the GDPR does not apply established by the GDPR and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of articles 55 para. 1, 2 para. 1 and 3 para. 2 GDPR

Romanian DPA fined Med Life SA for the violations of Article 12(4) GDPR and Article 15(3) GDPR. Med Life SA was fined 9,839.6 RON, equivalent to €2,000

processor €30,000 under Article 58(2) GDPR and Article 83(4) GDPR for the breach of Article 32(2), Article 32(4) GDPR and Article 28(3) GDPR. As for the controller

|GDPR_Article_3=Article 99 GDPR |GDPR_Article_Link_3=Article 99 GDPR |GDPR_Article_4= |GDPR_Article_Link_4= |GDPR_Article_5= |GDPR_Article_Link_5= |GDPR_Article_6=

|GDPR_Article_3=Article 99 GDPR |GDPR_Article_Link_3=Article 99 GDPR |GDPR_Article_4= |GDPR_Article_Link_4= |GDPR_Article_5= |GDPR_Article_Link_5= |GDPR_Article_6=

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)

located in the Amsterdam district (Article 4 Brussels I bis Regulation 2 and Article 262 opening lines and under a Rv 3 ). 4.2. Insofar as the request of [applicants]

right of access (Article 12(4) GDPR). The DPA held that data concerning the vehicle of the complainant is personal data (Article 4(1) GDPR), since the data

a claim under Article 15 GDPR entitles the data subject to be provided with copies of their personal data and whether Article 15(3) GDPR contains an independent

around the processing of personal data subject to Article 10 GDPR. Pursuant to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, the Privacy Appeals Board conducted a balancing test

that if a trial is taking place, then Article 55(3) of the GDPR is triggered. The Company believed that this article suspends the obligation to provide access

interpretation of article 13 of the Wbp is no different from that of article 32 of the GDPR, described in paragraphs 2.3.2 and 2.3.3. Also in the period

according to Article 12(3) GDPR and Article 12(4) GDPR when a data subject may exercise their right of access according to Article 15(1) GDPR and Article 15(3)

the meaning of Article 4 GDPR and that it had an interest in secrecy that justified its refusal to provide a copy under Article 15(4) GDPR. Unsatisfied,

on final judgments did not comply with Article 25(1) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) and Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA reprimanded the controller for

on final judgments did not comply with Article 25(1) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) and Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA reprimanded the controller for

a violation of GDPR Art. 17 and Art. 12(3) & (4). The National Supervisory Authority found that there had been a violation of the GDPR and imposed a fine

no. 2, § 66 (3) sentence 3, § 68 (1) sentence 5 LFGB § 40 paragraph 1a Basic Law Article 5(1), first sentence VIG § 1, § 2, § 3, § 4 para. 4, § 5 para. 1

to be qualified as a health data pursuant to Article(4)(15) GDPR and that the scope of protection of Article 9(2) must be taken into account as a standard

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

the DPA held that it had violated Article 12(3) GDPR (the controller failed to answer within a month), Article 12(4) GDPR (The controller failed to provide

was processing personal data within the meaning of section 3(4) DPA and Article (4)(2) GDPR. 1.3 This Penalty Notice arises out of an incident from 25 May

the GDPR (document 38, p. 14}: • "Breach of art. 6.1GDPR: o the data processing for the purposes stated in parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of point 4.3 of the

objection for data processing under Article 21 GDPR and the principle of liability under Article 2(4) GDPR and Article 24 GDPR. The complainant, the data subject

(definition) Article 4.1: Data subject (definition) Article 4.2: Processing (definition) Article 4.3: Restriction of processing (definition) Article 4.4 : Profiling

etc.). 2.4.1.9. These documents must include all of the information provided for in Article 14 of the GDPR. 2.4.2. Exercise of people’s rights 2.4.2.1. The

infringed or has infringed") is achieved. 5. on point 3. Under Article 13.4, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Article 13.4 find legal grounds for refusal of access. cit

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

controller as referred to in Article 4, Section 7, of the GDPR. 4.3 Violation of the prohibition on processing health data 4.3.1 Introduction Health data

for the special categories. 4.4.3. Page 4 of the Declaration clearly lists the cases concerning the conditions of Article 6 with the relevant legal bases

decision of the Minister is no longer based on Article 17(3) GDPR. Instead the decision is based on Article 6(4) GDPR. However the Minister did not explain well

the right of access under Article 15(4) of the GDPR or section 22 of the DDPA can be invoked. It follows from Article 15 (4), that the right to obtain

personal data in violation of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 6(1) GDPR, Article 12(3) GDPR, Article 12(4) GDPR and Article 15 GDPR. As such, the DPA issued a

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

violating Article 5(1) GDPR Article 6 (1) GDPR Article 6(4) GDPR Article 9 GDPR Article 14 GDPR Article 30 GDPR Article 35 GDPR and Article 36 GDPR. The fine

of Article 4(11). The DPA thus found another violation of Article 6(1)(a). The DPA further held that the controller violated Article 4(11), Article 12(1)

with the precept was 01.12.2020. 3.3. On 1 December 2020, MustamäeApteek OÜ announced compliance with the precept. 3.4. On December 7, 2020, Mustamäe Apteek

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

processor, see Article 28(3)(a) GDPR. Document that all transfers of personal data to insecure third countries, are in line with the GDPR. Describe all

the fine under Article 7, under c of the 2019 Policy Rules. 4.3.4 Proportionality Ultimately, the AP judges on the basis of Articles 3: 4 and 5:46 of the

three (3) of the five (5) complainants in three (3) of the four (4) publications exceeded the principle of data minimisation in violation of Article 5(1)(c)

proceedings. 3.6.3. There is no dispute between the parties that the credit registration is based on article 4:32 Wft. This article implements Article 8 of Directive

the same search results on the basis of Article 12 (4) GDPR has been rejected by Google . Article 21 (1) of the GDPR provides that a data subject has the

Data Protection Regulation (2016/679) Article 12 (4), Article 17 (3), Article 21 (2) and (3), Article 25 (2), Article 58 (2) (b) Section 2 of the Health Care

accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR. Ten DPAs (AT, DE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, NL, NO, SE) raised objections, in accordance with Article 60(4) GDPR, to the Draft

found that there had been a violation of articles 12 para. 1, 3, 4 and 15 para. 1 of the GDPR, to the extent that the complained company never responded to

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

with its transparency obligation. (2) Contrary to the provisions of Article 28(3) GDPR, the controller did not have a processing agreement with the processor

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

security are reported in a timely manner in future. 4.3. Article 34 of the Data Protection Regulation Article 34 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation 1, it

Paragraph 3 and 4, Art. 15, Art. 77 Paragraph 1 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation - GDPR), OJ No. L119 of 4.5. 2016; §§ 4 Paragraph

data is a form of processing as referred to in the GDPR (article 4 sub 2 GDPR). Article 6 of the GDPR provides that the processing of personal data is only

under §§ 2(8) and 3(1) of the Cookie Law , the condition for voluntary and specific consent (as also described in Article 4(11) GDPR) was not met. In connection

limitation as used in Article 5 of the GDPR and that Article 17(1)(d) of the GDPR also does not apply.c. Is the method of registration inadequate?4.14. [applicant]

the request within a period of one month (Article 12(3)). Accordingly, the controller infringed Article 12(3) GDPR with respect to its handling of the access

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

thereby violating Article 5 (2) of the GDPR paragraph, i.e. the principle of "accountability". IV.3.4. Fulfilling stakeholder requests IV.3.4.1. Deletion of

[applicant] is therefore admissible in her request. 4.3. Pursuant to Article 21 (1) of the GDPR , persons such as [the applicant] can object to the processing

1, letter c) and e), par. 2 and par. 3, letter b); 9, par. 1, 2, 4, of the Regulation; Articles 2-ter, par. 1 and 3 and 2-septies, par. 8, of the Code is

1 No. 4 DSG 3) a) Section 52 para. 2 no. 7 DSG 2000 in conjunction with § 69 (5) DSG b) Art. 62 Para. 1 No. 4 DSG 4) a) Section 52 para. 2 no. 4 DSG 2000

based on a legitimate interest under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, so that the principle of lawfulness under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR is violated. This is due to the fact

are made by way of a resolution, unless a ruling is required. 3.3. on A) 3.3.1 Section 69 (4) of the DSG does not contain any transitional provisions regarding

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

An employer should explore the specific exceptions in Article 9(2)(b) GDPR to Article 9(2)(j) GDPR to lawfully process health-related data of employees

consent [Article 6(1)(a)], due to the nature of the employer-employee relationship.' 3. Rationale 3.1 Definitions 3.1.1 According to Articles 4(1) and 4(2) of

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

law “On Latvia 10 15 Article 4, Eleventh Part, Article 4, Paragraph one, Clause 3 Point (a) and the fourth paragraph of Article 4 Documents in the register

national law, Directive 01/2011 and Law 4624/2019, as well as the GDPR. According to Article 9(4) of Directive 01/2011, the transmission to third parties of

para 3.4) On 1 April 2022, the DPC shared its Draft Decision with the other Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) in accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR. Six

discontinued pursuant to Article 17, clause 1 (d) of the AVG. In grievance 4, [the appellant] again contests points 3.21 and 3.22. [the appellant] claims

acceptance and identification (points 3.3 and 3.5.2 of the General Terms and Conditions for letters nationally and point 4.1 of the product and price list ("PVV")

meaning of Article 6.4 Old Law. 2 DSGVO, which enables additional national deviations from the purpose, the compatibility test under Article 6.4, old version

explicit consent was needed under Article 9(2) GDPR and the conditions for consent pursuant to Article 4(11) GDPR had to be assessed in light of the relevant

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

AP refers to subsections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. 4.3.6 Proportionality and statutory maximum penalty Finally, pursuant to Sections 3:4 and 5:46 of the Awb (principle

minimize data. 4.4. The municipality takes the position that Article 17 paragraph 3 under b AVG in conjunction with Article 7.3.8 paragraph 3 Youth Act opposes

GDPR and Article 66.2 WOG); and • compliance with the transparency obligations (Article 12 GDPR) and the te provide information (Article 13 GDPR). Page

Chapter 3 and Sections 3, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 21, 23-24. Section 4 (5), Section 5 (3) to (5), (7) and (8), Section 13 (2) § 23, § 25, 25 / G. § (3), (4)

the under General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679. According to Article 33 of GDPR, in the case of a personal data breach, the Data Controller shall

hand can not verify its legalitytraining. 3.6.4. In view of what was mentioned in paragraphs 3.6.1. - 3.6.3. above, the DefendantThe perpetrator was obliged

permission in Article 6 (1) (c) GDPR and argues that it is the Viennese in accordance with Article 5 (3) of the EpiG in conjunction with Article 1 (2) (e)

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

the DPA to issue a referral in order to open an ex officio investigation (Article 63(1) of the Law establishing the Belgian DPA). This referral needs to indicate

the ePrivacy Directive and Articles 6(1)(a) and 7 GDPR, in the lights of Article 4(11) and Recital 32 GDPR. Following this report, the GBA issued a decision

obligation (Article 4:32 § 1 Wft). Therefore, Article 6(1)(c) GDPR was relevant. However, the Court highlighted that the phrase "at least on" in Article 6(1)

that the article’s publication was in violation of Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, when read in line with Article 85 GDPR. Article 5(1)(c) outlines

breaching Article 12(3) GDPR, since it failed to notify the data subject that her erasure request was satisfied, as well as Article 24(1) GDPR, given that

latest at the time of the first communication (Art. 14(3)(a) and (b) GDPR). However, Art. 14(1) to (4) GDPR shall not apply if and to the extent that the data

force of the GDPR, the controller also sent him a separate revocation letter referring to the operational reasons under Article 38(3) GDPR, second sentence

increase or decrease. 4.4 Conclusion The AP sets the total fine at €525,000. 4For the justification, see paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. 18/19,Date Unidentified

"lifting". (4.2) Exclusions (4.2.1) GDPR and AO restrictions 145 According to Art. 15 Para. 1 GDPR, the person concerned (Art. 4 No. 1 GDPR) has a right

mentioned in the Art. 14 GDPR. 4) No, in the assessment of the President of UODO, sending out information related to Art. 14 GDPR by regular mail to the

the obligations relating to the right to erase data (Articles 12.3 and 4 and Article 17 of the RGPD) and contained findings going further than the subject

additional submissions regarding Article 83(3) GDPR (“Meta IE Submissions on Article 83(3) GDPR”). December 2021 On3December2021,theIESAshareditsDraftDecisionwiththeCSAs

theAVGsserious. 3.6Conclusion The AP sets the total amount of the fines imposed at €3,700,000. 1For the justification, see also paragraph 3.3 and 3.4. 14/16,Date

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

incorrect applies Article 12.3 of the AVG. However, this is not correct. 33. Article 12.3 of the GDPR reads (in its relevant parts): ''Art. 12.3 The controller

complainant for the costs of the appeal (paragraph 5). 3.4.2. According to Article 55 (3) GDPR, the supervisory authorities are not responsible for supervising

the file (Article 95, §2, 3 ° WOG) 7. On 7 August 2019, a copy of the file will be sent to the defendants. Page 3 Substance decision 35/2020 - 3/11 8. On

adversely affect the rights and freedom of the others, pursuant to Article 15(4) GDPR. Also, it found that the national law - Money Laundering and Terrorist

violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 9 GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, and in accordance with Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the

a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Generally, a controller

[The equivalent GDPR Article to Article 48(3)(a) EU GDPR is Article 46(3)(a) GDPR, and Article 50(1)(d) EU GDPR is Article 49(1)(d) GDPR.] Share blogs or

(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)

issues a reprimand under Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. After this, the DPA draws attention to the fact that pursuant of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, data must be processed

in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 1, preamble and under b, of the GDPR. 4.4. Article 6, paragraph 1, opening words, of the GDPR stipulates that processing

of him or her, cf. 2. tölul. Article 3 Act no. 90/2018 and point 1. Article 4 of the Regulation. According to para. Article 4 Act no. 90/2018, the Act and

under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. The DPA also requires that the company implement internal controls of their credit rating process as per Article 24 GDPR. 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

increase or decrease. 4.4 Conclusion The AP sets the total fine at €400,000. 8For the justification, see paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. 24/25Date Unidentified

Data Authority2019 53 3.3Penaltyforviolatingthesecurityofprocessing 53 3.3.1 Nature, seriousness and duration of the infringement 54 3.3.2 Negligent nature

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

Protection 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

increase or decrease. 4.4 Conclusion The AP sets the total fine at €450,000. 6For the justification, see paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. 23/41Date Unidentified

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

Page 4 4 (7) On November 8, 2015, I filed a complaint with the Data Protection Inspectorate (AKI) and demanded that the AKI rapidly implement Article 58

especially: 1) Violation of article 4.11 GDPR read in conjunction with article 6.1 a) GDPR as well Articles 7.1 and 7.3 GDPR: the Inspection Service determines

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

(hereinafter: the GDPR) applies on 25 May 2018 become. The GDPR imposes the same obligation in Article 32, paragraph 1, as it applied under Article 13 6. The UWV

pursuant to Article 12(3) of the AVG. If, as in this case, such a decision is taken by an administrative body, then, pursuant to Article 34 of the GDPR Implementing

obligation imposed on public authorities under Article 37(1) GDPR. This obligation is also within Article 34(1) and (3) of the Spanish data protection law (LOPDGDD)

of article 17 of the GDPR. X Classification of the infringement of article 17 of the GDPR The aforementioned infringement of article 17 of the GDPR supposes

out in Article 12 (3) of the General Data Protection Regulation, the Debtor informed by electronic means on 7 March 2019, in accordance with Article 15 (1)

been destroyed. The individual complained before the DPA revoking Article 15(1) and (3) GDPR and the DPA to order the delivering of the requested information

recording is "processing" of "personal data" within the meaning of Article 4(1) and 4(2) GDPR. Therefore, the data subject has the right to request access to

in relation to proceedings under Article 78(1) of the GDPR. The Court notes that Article 58(4) and Article 78 of the GDPR give expression to the right to

required by Article 35(3)(b). The AEPD also held that there had a been a violation of Article 32 because of a failure to comply with GDPR security measure

58(2)(d) GDPR the DPA was entitled to order the shutdown camera 2 during the opening hours of the shopping mall and to reposition cameras 3 and 4. Share

fairness of processing (Article 5(1)(a) GDPR), data minimisation (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR), and data protection by default (Article 25(2) GDPR). The DPA suggested

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

subject pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR, for a theft of their personal identity and financial data, because it violated Article 32(1) GDPR which led to a data

personal data under Article 17 GDPR. On 21 September 2021, the controller confirmed the deletion, as required by Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR. However, the complainant

Privacy Ordinance article 58 no. 2. 4.2 Requirements for treatment protocol Pursuant to Article 30 of the Privacy Regulation (and Article 24 of Directive

2023 standard B-VG Art 133 Paragraph 4 DSG §24 DSG §4 GDPR Art 12 GDPR Art 15 GDPR Art 15 Paragraph 1 litc GDPR Art77 UWG §26b paragraph 1 B-VG Art. 133

the processing continued until 4 June 2018 see also Article 5, paragraph 1, letter a), c) and e) of the Regulation). 3. Conclusions: unlawfulness of treatment

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

en hij deze zaak niet wenst verder te zetten. 2. Rechtsgrond Artikel 12.4 AVG 4. Wanneer de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke geen gevolg geeft aan het verzoek

submitted its observations, which, in accordance with Article 54(1)(b), (3) and (4), (4) and (4), (5) and (5), (5) and (5), (5) and (5), (5) and (6). 2

obliging Ziggo to send warning letters 3.3. The preliminary relief judge has explained in considerations 3.31 to 3.41 that the basis on which Ziggo is obliged

(listed in Article 57 of the GDPR) including that of dealing with complaints (article 57.1.f) of the GDPR) as well as a number of powers (article 58 of the

violating Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(2) GDPR, Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article 14 GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR, and Article

(definition) Article 4.1: Data subject (definition) Article 4.2: Processing (definition) Article 4.3: Restriction of processing (definition) Article 4.4: Profileing

complies with GDPR 3.3.1 CSR et al further argue that the use of Proctorio's software for online examinations does not meet the requirements of the GDPR. According

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

intention to infringe either article 5(1)( c) or article 34(1) of the GDPR. Legal framework 8.1. Pursuant to Article 5(1)(c) of the GDPR “Personal Data shall be:

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

Applicable GDPR Provisions 4.4 In this case, the first question that arises is whether the listing of the search results is lawful. In this case, Article 6(1)(f)

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) GDPR

ofcontroller (article 4.7 of the GDPR), the scope of the GDPR (article3.1 of the GDPR), the right to erasure (article 17 of the GDPR) and its powers (article 58.2of

their privacy policy in line with Article 6(1)(a) GDPR within a month. The AEPD also held that URLs 1-4 breached Article 22(2) of the Law 34/2002 (LSSI)

of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, and to bring its processing into compliance with Article 6(1) GDPR. Furthermore, pursuant to Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 GDPR, and

processing of personal data within the meaning of Article 4 GDPR and is it justified on the basis of Article 6 GDPR? Can the controller raise the argument that

company result in a breach of Article 37 GDPR? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) found that Conseguridad SL had violated Article 37(1)(b) GDPR by not having designated

people affected and the level of damage the elves suffered (article 83.2.4 of the GDPR) 4.1.4. The Data Protection Authority should have taken into account

According to Article 15.3 GDPR, the data subject also has the right to obtaincopy of the personal data which is the object of the processing. Article 15.4 of the

person concerned. ” 4.3.1- As regards respect for the principles of minimization and finality (article 5.1.c. and article 5.1.b of the GDPR) 24. In its capacity

and 5 (3) of Directive 2002/58, read in conjunction with Article 2 (h) of Directive 95/46 and Regulation 2016/679 4 Article 6 (11) and Article 6 (1) (a)

personal data pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) and Article 4(1) GDPR. Pursuant to the FOIA and the GDPR, the ICO balanced the right

contract, as expressly follows from article 4.4 of RD 1164/2001, which develops the provisions to in article 52.3 of the LSE and to which it refers literally

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

positions in the areas referred to in Article 3 of the Ministerial Decree of 7 May 2019 (number of years), area of interest. 3. Preliminary assessments of the

publicly available on the Internet. However, it follows from Article 28(1) GDPR and Article 28(3)(f) GDPR that the data processor (in this instance Kombit A/S)

requirements of Article 6(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7 GDPR, which cannot be superseded by relying on Article 6(1)(b) GDPR? Is Article 5(1)(c) GDPR (data

of personal data, cf. Article 5, also to the processing of personal data pursuant to Article 16. This interpretation of Article 16 is based on, among others

fairness principle, violating Article 5(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, and Article 6 in conjunction with Article 8 Personal Data Protection

provided for in Article 12.3 of the GDPR, nor informed the claimants of a possible reason for its inaction as required by article 12.4 of the GDPR. It also considers

issued under this article. " III Article 73 of the LOPDDG indicates: Violations considered serious "Based on what is established in article 83.4 of Regulation

breach of Article 28 paragraphs 3 and 4 of the GDPR is clear. 2. On the breach of the obligation to ensure data security 49. According to Article 32 of the

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

reactivated according to plan. It follows from Article 28 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation Article 3 (3) (f) requires the data controller to assist the

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

regarding - of article L.121-20-3 of the Consumer Code in its wording prior to the law of March 17, 2014 for all contracts, - of article R.132-1 / 4 ° & 5 ° of

and 3rd floors. 3. Photographs of the exterior of the property and of the 4 cameras installed inside the east (entrance, 1st, 2nd and 3 floors). 4. Model

of which ING suffered loss. 3.3 This decision and the grounds on which it was based are contested by [the appellant]. 3.4 The Court of Appeal will first

principle (Article 5.1 b) GDPR) and the principle of minimum data processing (Article 5.1 c) GDPR). This follows from both provisions of the GDPR camera surveillance

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

complainant, prima facie cannot be placed in one of the cases listed in Article 35.3 GDPR. This brief explanation will suffice: the Litigation Chamber may conduct

paying profiles. II.4. Article 12(1),(2) and (3), Article 17, Article 19, Article 24(1) and Article 25(1) AVG 63. Article 12 (1) GDPR stipulates that the

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

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

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

outside the material scope of the GDPR. Also, with regards to the definition of personal data from Article 4(1) GDPR, the DPA did not reach a firm conclusion

contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR), nor could be based on legitimate interest of the controller (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR). Consent (Article 6(1)(a) GDPR) could

handed down under this article." III Article 73 of the LOPDDG states Infringements considered serious: "In accordance with Article 83(4) of Regulation (EU)

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

obligation under Article 37(7) GDPR. The DPA ordered the controller to comply with his obligations under Article 13(1)(b) GDPR and Article 37(7) GDPR and to publish

claimant’s signature constitute a breach under the GDPR? The AEPD held that Vodafone violated Article 6(1) GDPR, as they had processed the claimant’s data without

sedeagpd.gob.es 4/12 3. Adherence to a code of conduct approved in accordance with article 40 or to a certification mechanism approved under article 42 may serve

it was not possible to rely on Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. Secondly, the DPA recalled that, according to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, processing of personal data on

and 13 GDPR, he may exercise his powers article 58 par. 2 GDPR its corrective powers in combination with the resulting ones from article 4 par. 3 item d)

should have applied Article 35 GDPR. In light of the above, the Italian DPA used its corrective powers under Article 58(2)(c) and 83 GDPR and fined the controller

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

within the meaning of Article 26 GDPR, as determined in section 2.3. 135. The legal provision on data protection by design, Article 25 GDPR, states expressly

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

juncto 7.3 of the RGPD; - that it is not necessary to pronounce one of the measures provided for in Article 100, §1 of the ACL. Pursuant to Article 108, §

Protection 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

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

relation to the article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.4.a) of the RGPD with sanction of awareness. 3. Violation of article 34 of the RGPD in

purport of the Wbp (old). 3.3 Against this decision [appellants] come up with fifteen grievances. ABN AMRO contested the grievances. 3.4 Grounds 1 and 9 up to

ruled that the one-month deadline was not respected and thus that, Article 12(3) GDPR was infringed. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles

Point 6 of Article 3 Act no. 90/2018 and item 7 of Article 4. of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, cf. and the first and second paragraphs. Article 4 Epidemiology

subjects and the obligations and rights of the controller'), as per Article 28(3) GDPR, was lacking. Additionally, the DPA highlighted that such contract

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

missions, applying all the exclusions provided for in article 2 of the GDPR. ”, Resulting from its article 3 under the heading“ National control authority ”that“The

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

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

pursuant to Article 82(4) and Recital 146 sent. 7. However, joint and several liability presupposes that the conditions of paragraphs 2 and 3 are fulfilled

by the GDPR, on the other, Article 28, paragraph 3 of the GDPR does not provide any indication regarding the obligation to conclude a deed of appointment

or more exceptions from those contained in art. 3. 4 GDPR. In this sense, those provided for in art. 34.3 a) and b). C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001

data in the deeds, based on Article 40(2)(c) of the Dutch Civil-law notaries act (Wet op het notarisambt) and Article 18(1)(3) of the Land registry act (Kadasterwet);

Data Protection Regulation5. Article 5 (1) (a), Article 5 (2) and Article 13 Article 1 (1) to (2). III.3. JogkövetkezményekIII.3.1. The Authority is responsible

in the public interest, cf. Item 5 Article 9 Act no. 90/2018 and paragraph 3 e. Article 6 Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 3. Conclusion Privacy protects that

fundamental principles of the GDPR, notably Article 5(1)(a) and (e) GDPR. The DPA found violations of various provisions of the GDPR. It held that the controller

Code of Administrative Justice. Article 3: The surplus of the conclusions of the request is rejected. Article 4: This decision will be notified to the National

minimization in Article 5, paragraph 1, letter c. 4.2. Security of personal data processing - Article 5 (1) (f) and Article 32 10 As stated in paragraph 3, Article

erased and thus also violates Article 17.1(c) AVG. 3.2. With regard to the infringement of Article 6.1 and Article 21.4 of the AVG 29. In its statement

violation of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/6 FIFTH: The

withdrawal of consent under Article 7(3) GDPR. The Authority also considers the existence of a deletion request under Article 17 GDPR. The AEPD concludes that

which article of the GDPR was violated. However, considering the plaintiff made a request for the removal of her data, it is likely that Article 17 GDPR

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 that

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

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

controller, under Article 24 and 32 of the GDPR, which led to a breach of the security of personal data under Article 4(12) of the GDPR, and no proof that

company, Iberdrola Clientes, S.A.U for infringing Article 21 GDPR, Article 48(1)(b) LGT, and Article 23(4) LOPDGDD. The initial proposed fine was €10000 however

(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

resume. 3 The Marktenhof states in point 4.7. of the judgment article 6, d) and article 6, e) of the GBA law, but this should be read as article 6.1. d)

policy of the Disputes Chamber. 4 Cf. criterion A.5. in the dismissal policy of the Disputes Chamber. 5 Article 15.3 GDPR: “The right to obtain a copy referred

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

specified in article 32 GDPR (security of processing). In determining the amount of the fine, certain aggravating factors of article 83 GDPR were considered

supplementary national legal basis, cf. the Privacy Ordinance Article 6 (1) (e) and Article 6 (3).4 Our assessment is that Aquateknikk neither performs a task

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

and the GDPR, in particular with regard to the competence, tasks and powers of data protection authorities ). 4. In article 4 par. 7 of the GDPR, a data

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

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

information pursuant to Article 15 (1) of the GDPR relates to "personal data relating to an individual" pursuant to Article 4 No. 1 of the GDPR. In addition, the

ends and means of such activity, by virtue of article 4.7 of the GDPR. Article 4 section 12 of the GDPR broadly defines “violations of security of personal

CFR Art8 para 11 CFR Art11 para 1 ECHR Art10 para 1 GDPR Art4 no 2 GDPR Art4 no 7 GDPR Art85 para 1 GDPR Art85 para 2 Text GZ: DSB-D123.768/0004-DSB/2019