Search results

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

longer of importance to society. As a result, and in accordance with Article 58(2)(c) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to comply with the data subject's

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

on the merits in accordance with Article 98 et seq. DPAA, to: - pursuant to Article 58.2(c) of the GDPR and Article 95(1)(5) of the DPAA , to order the

imposed two corrective measures on the controller according to Article 58(2)(c) and (d) GDPR and the fine of 14,420.4 lei, the equivalent of the amount of

the GDPR within 1 month starting from the receipt of this decision; c)ordered the company comply with the Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR, as

complete, clear and reasonably certified pursuant to both Article 58(2) GDPR. and Article 21 of N. 2472/1997. Notably, the DPA focused only on the portion

regard to Article 83 (2) (k) of the GDPR, Article 76 of the GDPR, ‘Sanctions and remedial measures’, provides: ‘2. In accordance with Article 83 (2) (k) of

subjects had not suffered any financial harm. Furthermore, as per Article 58(2)(c) and (d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to comply with the data subjects’

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

subject's request to remove the search result link as per Article 58(2)(c) GDPR? Article 87 GDPR gives Member States the right to specify conditions for

Protection Officer shall instruct the controller in accordance with Article 58 (2) (c) of the General Data Protection Regulation to comply with the applicant's

procedure, the AEPD understood that the defendant could have breached article 58(2)(c) GDPR: on the basis of the available evidence, the defendant did not answer

violated Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 5(1)(e) GDPR, Article 12(2) GDPR, Article 12(6) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. In accordance with Article 58(2)(c) GDPR

with Article 5 (1) (c) of the General Data Protection Regulation; and (3) whether the controller should be ordered in accordance with Article 58 (2) (c)

Thus, it violated Article 15 GDPR. The Datatilsynet issued an injunction and ordered the company, as foreseen under 58(2)(c) GDPR, to carry out a concrete

Belgian DPA used Article 58(2)(c) GDPR to order a controller to comply with an erasure request of a data subject pursuant to Article 17 GDPR after it failed

circumstances of the specific case (art. 58, par. 2, letter i) Regulation). 4. Order for an injunction. Pursuant to art. 58(2)(i) of the Regulation and art. 166(3)

in line with Article 13 GDPR. On the DSB's request, the controller declared R*** Hotels GmbH as its representative under Article 27 GDPR and sent a reply

data within the meaning of Article 4(2) in the course of proceedings under both Articles 77 and 78 of the GDPR. Article 4(2) refers to disclosure as a

corrective powers under Article 58(2) GDPR, namely 58(2)(d) and (g) GDPR, may be exercised by the DPA on its own motion. Article 58(2)(c) GDPR, on the other hand

violation of Articles 5,15 GDPR, 33 Law 4624/2019. Thus, the HDPA, making use of its corrective powers of Article 58(2)c GDPR, ordered the College to provide

exercise his or her rights (Article 58(2)(c) GDPR), the power to impose a fine under Article 83 GDPR (Article 58(2)(i) GDPR) does not serve to safeguard

complaint with Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. However, Article 58(2)(b) GDPR contains the authority of the DPA to reprimand a controller. Article 58(2)(c) GDPR contains

processing on the merits in accordance with Article 98 et seq. WOG, to: - on the basis of Article 58.2.c) GDPR and Article 95, §1, 5° WOG to the controller order

within the meaning of Article 100 of the WOG. The Disputes Chamber has thus decided, on the basis of Article 58.2.c) GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the WOG

treatment on the merits in accordance with Article 98 et seq. WOG , to: - on the basis of Article 58.2, c) GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5 ° WOG, the controller order

within the meaning of Article 15 (4) of the Data Protection Regulation. Decision and justification of the EDPS Pursuant to Article 58 (2) (c) of the Data Protection

accuracy and updating of data as provided in Art 5 par 1 let d GDPR. Following Art 58 2 c and g GDPR, the Guarantor finds the data subject´s complaint well-founded

the request. On 23 July 2021, the DPA exercised its power under Article 58(2)(c) GDPR and ordered the controller to comply with the access request. However

concluded a prima facie breach of Article 15 GDPR and Article 17 GDPR in combination with Article 12(3) GDPR and Article 12(4) GDPR, because the controller did

with complete information pursuant to Article 15(1) GDPR. Therefore, using its power laid down in Article 58(2)(c) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to

of the ACL: - to order the data controller, pursuant to Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the LCA, to comply with the complainant's

investigation in accordance with article 91 2. In this regard, it follows from the text of the contested decision: Pursuant to Article 95, §2 of the Law of 3 December

controller has acted in violation of Article 12.3 and 12.4 GDPR, as well as Article 17.1 GDPR. 2 1 Article 12 GDPR […] 3. The controller shall provide the

termination. Article 5(1)(c) was therefore also violated. The DPA concluded that Article 5(1)(a), 5(1)(c) and 6(1) were violated and pursuant Article 58(2)(c) ,

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

hearing on the merits in accordance with Article 98 ff. WOG , at: - on the basis of Article 58.2, c) GDPR and Article 95, §1, 5° WOG, to order the defendant

result, the controllers acted in 1 2 3 contravenes Articles 5.2 and 12.2 GDPR, as well as Article 17.1 GDPR. 1 Article 5.2 GDPR. The controller is responsible

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

pursuant of Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. The DPA further ordered the controller to comply with the access request pursuant of Article 58(2)(c) GDPR and to deal

sufficient by the supervisory authority. Therefore, pursuant to Article 58(2)(c) and (g) GDPR, the Italian DPA ordered the controllers to take action in order

it and the applicants, i.e. on the basis of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR. However, pursuant to Article 17(3)(e) GDPR, the right to request from the controller the

according to Article 19 GDPR. The DPA held that the controllers could have breached Article 21(2) GDPR, Article 21(3) GDPR and Article 17(1)(c) GDPR in combination

based on Article 95, § 1, 5° WOG (law establishing the Belgian DPA) and Article 58(2)(c) GDPR. This order was not a final decision in light of article 100 WOG

flows by the SA pursuant to Article 58(2) GDPR or failure to provide access in violation of Article 58(1) GDPR. Article 83(6) GDPR is a superfluous provision

possible "legitimate interest" under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Equally to Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR require that Union or Member State

its decision on the following legal bases: Article 12, Article 15, Article 57(1)(f), Article 58(2)(c) and Article 77(1) of the Basic Data Protection Regulation

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

(see Article 52 GDPR) and shall be provided with various competencies (Articles 55, 56 GDPR), tasks (Article 57 GDPR) and powers (Article 58 GDPR). For

from Articles 13(2)(b) and 14(2)(c) GDPR. However, Article 21(4) GDPR specifies that the right to object under Article 21(1) and 21(2) GDPR (i.e. the right

and (2) GDPR, Article 14 (1) and (1) 2 GDPR, Article 5 (2) GDPR, Article 24 (1) GDPR and Article 25 (1) GDPR. II. Motivation II.1. Interest of the complainant

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

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

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

Datenschutzrecht, Article 32 GDPR, margin number 40 (C.H. Beck 2019). Jandt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 32 GDPR, margin number 25 (C.H. Beck 2020

subject to exercise further rights under the GDPR. Therefore, the DPA used its power under Article 58(2)(c) GDPR and ordered ELGA to provide the requested

provide the data subject with the requested information, pursuant to Article 58(2)(c) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles here! The

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

within the meaning of Article 100 of the WOG. The Disputes Chamber has thus decided, on the basis of Article 58.2.c) GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the WOG

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

controller acted in violation of the GDPR. It ordered the controller pursuant to its powers of Article 58(2)(c) GDPR to comply with the access request. Share

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

provision to Article 58 GDPR. In practice, this means that when the Article is relied upon in conjunction with an order made under Article 58 GDPR, no additional

deadline of Article 36(1) GDPR, and it is still disputed whether the outcome of the procedure rather resembles that of Article 58(3)(a) GDPR or Article 58(3)(b)

obligation under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. Such information is not transparent and does not facilitate the exercise of rights. Article 13(1)(c) GDPR must therefore

within the meaning of Article 100 of the WOG. The Disputes Chamber has thus decided, on the basis of Article 58.2 c) GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the WOG

(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)

DatenschutzR, Article 78 GDPR, margin number 8 (C.H. Beck 2020, 36th edition); Körffer in Paal, Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 78 GDPR, margin number 2, C.H. (C.H. Beck

Regulation, Article 82 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd edition). Bergt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 82 GDPR, margin number 57 (C.H. Beck

appropriate security of the personal data under Article 5(2) and 32(1) GDPR. Pursuant Article 58(2)(c) GDPR, it asked the data controller to take measures

nung, Article 33 GDPR, margin number 15 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd edition). König, Schaupp, in Knyrim, Der Datkomm, Article 79 GDPR, margin number 58/1 (rdb

without delay. It also issued a reprimand in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR and Article Article 100, §1, 5° WOG in addition to these corrective measures

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

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

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

Subsection 2 of the WOG (Articles 94 to 97). Decision 32/2024 – 5/7 The Disputes Chamber has thus decided, on the basis of Article 58.2.c) GDPR and Article 95

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

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

for a violation of article 58.2 c) of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.6 of the GDPR, classified as very serious in article 72.1.m) of the LOPDGDD

additional benefit of Article 14(1)(d) GDPR may be questionable, if one agrees that Article 14(1)(c) (see commentary on Article 13(1)(c) GDPR) already requires

must also be involved in the drafting of the DPIA under Article 35(2) GDPR and Article 39(1)(c) GDPR, and their advice should be recorded by the controller

controller to comply with the access request pursuant of Article 58(2)(c) GDPR and Article 95(1)(5) LCA (act establishing the data protection authority). The

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

dnung, Article 16 GDPR, margin number 18 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition). For further information, please refer to Article 18 GDPR. CJEU, Case C-434/16,

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

related decisions in Category:Article 2 GDPR Bäcker, in Wolff, Brink, BeckOK Datenschutzrecht, Article 2 GDPR, margin number 2 (C.H. Beck 2021, 38th edition)

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

meaning Recital 86 GDPR). However, Article 34 GDPR does not provide a specific deadline of 72 hours as is the case in Article 33 GDPR. Instead, timelines

February 9, 2021 in which the Disputes Chamber pursuant to Article 58.2, c) GDPR and Article 95, §1, 5° WOG orders the defendant to comply with the request

accordance with Article 58(2) [GDPR]”. These is a reference to the information that SAs must keep in internal records according to Article 57(1)(u) GDPR. The report

applicability of Article 49(1) GDPR, the documentation of suitable safeguards (Article 30(2)(c) GDPR). See commentary under Article 30(1)(e) GDPR. The processor's

laid down in Article 57 GDPR. The powers of SAs are both investigative and corrective, which are set out in Article 58 GDPR. Article 52(2) GDPR requires two

with the GDPR (Article 31 GDPR). Direct liability of the representative is limited to the obligations set out in Article 30 and Article 58(1)(a) GDPR. Article

BDSG, Article 54 GDPR, margin number 2 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd Edition). Boehm, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 54 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck

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

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

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

within the meaning of Article 100 of the WOG. 24. The Disputes Chamber has thus decided, on the basis of Article 58.2.c GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° WOG, to

definition for "processing" in Article 4(2) GDPR). If data is been made public, the applicable provision is Article 17(2) GDPR, provided that all requirements

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

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

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

proposed amendments to the GDPR (pursuant to Article 70(1)(b) GDPR). Although not explicitly mentioned in Article 69(2) GDPR, the requirement that the Board

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

to Article 57 GDPR and for their powers please refer to Article 58 GDPR. See Recital 122 GDPR. In this respect, reference should be made to Case C‑288/12

contrast to Article 23(1)(e) GDPR, which sets out strict requirements for the Union or Member State's law restricting GDPR rights, Article 18(2) GDPR does not

difference between Article 42(1) GDPR and Article 42(2) GDPR is that in the former, the applicant for certification is subject to the GDPR, while in latter

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

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, 2nd edition);

entering the contract, Article 22(2)(a) GDPR does not mention this additional aspect. In any case, the application of Article 22(2)(a) GDPR is always subjected

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

Regulation (GDPR), Article 84 GDPR, p. 1198 (Oxford University Press 2020). Gola, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 84, margin numbers 1-2 (C.H. Beck 2018

DS-GVO BDSG, Article 71 GDPR, margin number 2 (C.H. Beck 2021, 3rd edition). Dix in Kühling, Buchner, GDPR BDSG, Article 71 GDPR, margin number 6 (C.H. Beck

mechanism referred to in Article 63 GDPR (Article 28(8) GDPR). The Commission has made use of its power under Article 28(7) GDPR and published standard contractual

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

According to Article 80(2) GDPR, where legislated for by Member States, this right extends to Articles 77, 78 and 79 GDPR, but not Article 82 GDPR. This exclusion

DS-GVO, Article 85 GDPR, margin number 9 (C.H. Beck, 2018, 2nd edition). We refer, in that respect, to the Commentary on Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. Spiecker

a binding dispute resolution procedure in accordance with Article 65 GDPR. Article 64(2) GDPR allows any SA, the EDPB Chair or the Commission to request

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

and jurisdiction provisions (Articles 47(1)(b), 47(2)(d), 47(2)(e), 47(2)(g), 47(2)(i), 47(2)(l) GDPR); a duty for the EU BCR member to accept responsibility

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

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

transparency (Article 5.1 of the GDPR), the principle of minimum data processing (Article 5.1 c) GDPR) and the storage limitation (Article 5.1 e) GDPR) respected

the GDPR (Article 3)’, 12 November 2019 (Version 2.1), p. 6 (available here). EDPB, ‘Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)’

controller is subject, under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. In line with the general objectives of the GDPR, as outlined in Article 1 GDPR Article 16 TFEU, SAs are also

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, 2nd edition)

number 2 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition). Kampert, in Sydow, Europäische Datenschutzgrundverordnung, Article 11 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition)

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

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

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 delegated

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

in Gola, DS-GVO, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 2 (C.H. Beck2018, 2nd edition); Jahnel in Jahnel, DSGVO, Article 81 GDPR, margin number 2 (Jan Sramek 2021);

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

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 49 GDPR, p. 846 (Oxford University Press 2020). EDPB, ‘Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation

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

functions, a permissive function (Article 88(1) GDPR) and a conditional function (Article 88(2) GDPR). While Article 88(2) GDPR determines the scope of the opening

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

BDSG, Article 76 GDPR, margin number 1 (C.H. Beck 2020, 3rd edition). Docksey, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article

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

with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2). You can help us fill this section! Article 43 GDPR explains the procedure involved in establishing

therefore unlawful and the requirements of Article 17 (1) (d) GDPR are met. According to Article 58 (2) (c) GDPR, the BF was also to be instructed to delete

Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023), p 1090. CJEU, Case C‑28/08, European

nung, Article 45 GDPR, margin number 6 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition). Zerdick, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 45 GDPR, margin

to in Article 61(6) GDPR. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2) GDPR. → You

infringement of Article 5.1.b), c) and e) GDPR and Article 5.1.a) j° Article 6.1 GDPR; - on the basis of Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5°

deals 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

date of effect under Article 94 GDPR. In order to ensure a sense of continuity within the regulatory framework, Article 94(2) GDPR provides that any reference

21(1) GDPR), pursuant to Article 95(1)(5) WOG and Article 58(2)(c) GDPR. In particular, the controller had to erase the postal address of the property, including

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

directly to children. As such, Article 8 GDPR stipulates additional requirements for consent by children. Article 8 GDPR applies only if the processing

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

DSG §24 paragraph 1 DSG §24 paragraph 5 GDPR Art17 GDPR Art4 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art58 GDPR Art6 VwGVG §28 paragraph 2 saying W101 2213581-1/5E IN THE NAME OF

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

consent pursuant to point (a) of Article 6(1) or point (a) of Article 9(2) or on a contract pursuant to point (b) of Article 6(1); and (b) the processing is

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

Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice in joint preliminary references C-293/12 and C-594/12 Digital Rights Ireland and Others. Both cases concern the validity

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

under Article 57(1)(f) of the GDPR, each supervisory authority is required on its territory to handle complaints which, in accordance with Article 77(1)

out in Article 14(5)(a) and Article 14(5)(c) GDPR. The DPA rejected the controller's views as it argued that the exceptions in Article 14(5) GDPR should

reference, see Article 143 of the Code). However, detailed time-limits can be found in Regolamento n. 2/2019 cited above. Under Article 154 of the Code

ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC, and the GDPR to the CJEU. The case was referred to the Court of Justice on 5 October 2017 - before the GDPR became applicable

within the meaning of Article 58(2)(c) of the GDPR. c of the GDPR. Recital52 Rights within the meaning of Article 58(2)(c) of the GDPR are, first and foremost

4 DSG §1 DSG §24 GDPR Art12 GDPR Art14 GDPR Art32 GDPR Art5 GDPR Art57 GDPR Art58 GDPR Art6 GDPR Art77 GDPR Art83 VwGVG §28 paragraph 2 saying W214 2225733-1/17E

elements. 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%

identifier) pursuant to Article 4(1) of the GDPR. c) Combination with other elements The fulfillment of Article 4(1) of the GDPR becomes even more apparent

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

in the Member States. Example: Article 6(1)(a) GDPR Example: Not Art. 6 Abs 1 Lit a GDPR or Article 6 GDPR or GDPR Article 6, Sec 1(a) Recitals are also

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

regulation[1] article 5, subsection 2, cf. Article 5, subsection 1, letters c and f, and Article 5, subsection 1, letter a, cf. Article 6, subsection 1

imposed on OpenAI a temporary limitation of processing pursuant to Article 58(2)(f) GDPR. Such limitation concerns all processing operations involving data

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

DI-2020-11373 2(23) Date: 2023-06-30 2.2.1 Applicable regulations, etc. ................................................... .....9 2.2.2 The Privacy Protection

affinity" on the power of redress under Article 58(2)(d) of the DPA. In fact, it should have relied on Article 58(2)(f) of the DSGVO. In principle, this must

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

reasoned in accordance with Article 4(24) GDPR and, after conducting its own assessment of the factors under Article 83(2) GDPR, found that the proposed fine

with Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to bring its processing operations into compliance with the provisions of Article 9 GDPR. The

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

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

the exceptions to the one stop shop mechanism applies (Article 55(2), Article 56(2), or Article 66). It interesting to note that the Court confirms that

fine (Articles 58(2)(i) GDPR) & 83 GDPR) and, after having taken into consideration Article 83(2) GDPR's fine measuring principles and ARTICLE 29 Data Protection

Breyer, C-582/14, EU:C:2016:779, paras 45–46. 10 ECJ judgment M.I.C.M, C-597/19, EU:C:2021:492, paragraphs 102–104 and Breyer judgment, C-582/14, EU:C:2016:779

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

conformity with Article 5.1. c), Article 6.1., Article 13.1. c), Article 13.1. c), Article 13.1. e) and Article 13.2. a) of the DGPS pursuant to Article 101 of

under Article 15(4)(c) and 15(8) of Law No. 4624/19, the national data protection law, in conjunction with Article 58(2) GDPR. According to Article 6 of

in the article 57.1 and the powers granted in article 58.1 of the Regulation (EU) C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/12 2016/679

Articles 5, 6 par. 1 point (e) and 9 par. 2 (g) GDPR 2016/679 and c) calls, pursuant to article 58 par.2 verse. d GDPR 2016/679, 401 General Military Hospital

conferred on it by the provisions of Article 58 of the GDPR and Article 15 of Law 4624/2019. 2. As Article 5 of the GDPR defines the processing principles

...................... .11 2.2.1 Applicable regulations, etc. ................................................ ...11 2.2.2 The Privacy Protection Authority's

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

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

guaranteed in Article 8 i 20 ECJ judgment M.I.C.M, C-597/19, EU:C:2021:492, paragraphs 102–104 and Breyer judgment, C-582/14 EU:C:2016:779, paragraph 49. 2 IP address

particular case". According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned Regulation is compatible

the supervisory authority may, pursuant to Article 58 (2), letter i, cf. Article 83 (5), cf. Article 83 (2) impose it processing managers a violation fee

regard being had 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

by the EDPB pursuant to Article 66(2) GDPR. Temporary ban on processing (order) Pursuant to Article 66(1) GDPR and 58(2)(f) GDPR the Norwegian DPA consequently

with the provided for in article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the RGPD.

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

third parties (article 83.2.k, of the C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 10/11 RGPD in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD)

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

(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

to in Article 58, paragraph 2, letters a) to h) and j). In this way the corrective measures, which are all those provided for in the article 58.2 of the

in article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679”. VII Sanction C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 20/25 Article 58.2 of the GDPR establishes:

FOUNDATIONS OF LAW Yo C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/10 In accordance with the powers that article 58.2 of Regulation (EU)

life insurance company had breached Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 9 GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR as its as its practice was to process

” Regarding section k) of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", provides: "2. In accordance with the provisions

to or instead of the measures referred to in Article 58(2)(a) to (h) and (j) [..)', Article 83(2) of the GDPR recognizes the power of the national supervisory

violation of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, typified in the Article 83.5 of the GDPR. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/7 FIFTH: On

accordance with the powers that article 58.2 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter GDPR), grants each control authority

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

further consequent assessment by this Authority - to order, pursuant to Article 58(2)(f), against Tik Tok in its capacity as data controller, the measure

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

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) of

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

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

Moreover, the information provided as per Article 13 GDPR were not compliant with the requirements of Article 12 GDPR in light of the fact that TikTok services

particular case". According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the measure provided for in article 58.2.d) of the aforementioned Regulation is compatible

relation to letter k) of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, in its article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures" establishes that: "2. In accordance with

violated Article 5(1)(e) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant

person.” Article 9.2 of the GDPR however means that: “Section 1 will not apply when one of the following circumstances occurs:” which cover article 9.2.a) to

infringement of Article 5.1 c) AVG has been proven. f)Transparent information (Article 5.1(a); Article 12.1. and Article 13.1. and 13.2. AVG) 43.The complainant

pursuant to Article 17(2) DPA Act. 9. Moreover, as regards the one-stop-shop mechanism, Article 56 GDPR states: "Without prejudice to Article 55, the supervisory

provisions of Article 58 (2) (i) of the GDPR, each supervisory authority has, inter alia, the power to impose an administrative fine under Article 83, depending

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)

contemplated in article 83.2 of the RGPD and the article 76.2 of the LOPDGDD, with respect to the infraction committed by violating the established in article 5.1

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. a)

demands and given Google LLC an order in accordance with Article 58, paragraph 2, subsection c of the General Data Protection Regulation to comply with

these facts: one for the violation of article 5.1.f) RGPD, and another for article 32 GDPR. x Article 58.2 of the GDPR provides the following: “Each supervisory

General Data Protection Regulation Article 5(1)(a), (b) and (c). Article 7 Article 9 Article 25 paragraph 2 Article 58 Article 83 Data Protection Act Section

_ga=GA1.2.345900854.1597222413; cookie-agreed=2; __unam=67c8073-173e205d800-f576793-2; TS018cf77a=017ccc203c9e7bc4149f20e42e6a3643881397eb41e025f2c54bb e

1 and the tenants are Mr. B.B.B. and Ms. C.C.C., with an e-mail address for notification purposes ***EMAIL.2 FOURTH: On 07/02/19, the Subdirectorate General

FOUNDATIONS OF LAW C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/7 Yo In accordance with the powers that article 58.2 of Regulation (EU)

Compétence de la Chambre de Résolution des Litiges (Article 2 AVG ; Article 4 WOG) 55. Conformément à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, de l'AVG, le règlement s'applique

Articles 58(1)(a), 58(1)(e) and 58(2)(i) GDPR. It therefore imposed a €2000 fine on the defendant and applied corrective measures to get SC C&V Water Control

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

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

national court (Article 267 TFEU and C-567/20, EU: C:2022:352, paragraph 45 and case-law cited there). Question 1: Does Article 5(1)(b) GDPR allow a controller

reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA also ordered the controller to erase the

municipality could not rely on Article 6(1)(c) GDPR as a legal basis. This made the processing also unlawful under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. The HDPA fined the municipality

minimisation, pursuant to Article 58(2)(d). The Garante also fined the company €20000 for its breach of Articles 5(1)(a) and (c) GDPR. In determining the amount

the GDPR, pursuant to Articles 58(2)(b) and (d) respectively. For the violation of Article 5(1)(f), it issued a fine of €10000, pursuant to Article 58(2)(i)

by Article 83.2 of the RGPD, and with the provisions of Article 76 of the LOPDGDD, with respect to paragraph k) of the aforementioned Article 83.2 RGPD

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

alleged infringement of article 58.2 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 e) of the RGPD. 1. NAME D. B.B.B. as instructor and Dña. C.C.C. as secretary, indicating

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

relation to the incident and in light of the powers granted to me by section 58(2)(a) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the DPA decided to issue a warning to

enshrined in Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. The Finish DPA further ordered the controller to bring its processing activities into compliance under Article 58(2)(d) GDPR

connection 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,

within a specified period - Article 58. 2 d)-. In accordance with Article 83(2) of the RGPD, the measure provided for in Article 58(2)(d) of that Regulation

the supervisory authority with pursuant to article 58 (2), or failure to provide access in breach of article 58, Paragraph 1." Organic Law 3/2018, on Protection

infringements of Article 5(1)(c), Article 5(1)(e) and Article 6(1)(f) the DPC issued a reprimand to Airbnb pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) of the GDPR. In addition

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

RESOLVES: FIRST: TO IMPOSE C.C.C., with NIF ***NIF.1, for an infringement of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a penalty

accept the case, making a provisional file. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/3  When the time for Brexit to take effect

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

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: … (c) adequate

violation of data minimisation, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. No fines can be imposed against the controller and Article 83(5) GDPR can therefore not be imposed.

and Article 57(1)(a), Article 58(2)(d) and (i) in connection with Article 5(1)(a), (e) and (f) and (2), Article 24(1) and (2), Article 28, Article 30(1)(d)

processing time. 2. Decision on order and infringement fine The Data Inspectorate makes the following decisions: 1. Pursuant to Article 58 (2) (2) of the Privacy

infringement of Article 5.1.d) of the RGPD as defined in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. To appoint Mr. B.B.B. as instructor and Ms. C.C.C. as secretary

obligation of the controller (Article 6 (1) (c)) or to perform a public interest task or exercise public authority paragraph (e)). Article 6 (3) of the Data Protection

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

with Article 6 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 17 (1) (c) and that the information shall not be deleted in accordance with Article 17 (1)

hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged 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

DPA held that the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued a reprimand to

Ordinance Article 6 No. 1 letter f for this processing. Our legal basis for decisions on reprimands is the Privacy Ordinance, Article 58, No. 2, letter b

thatestablishes article 83.2 of the RGPD, and with the provisions of article 76 of theLOPDGDD, regarding section k) of the aforementioned article 83.2 RGPD.In

criteria stated in Article 83(5)(a) GDPR. In imposing the fine, the AEPD factored in accordance with Article 83(2) GDPR and Article 76 LOPDGDD the following

the 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

the alleged violation of article 6.1. of the RGPD typified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. 2. APPOINT D. C.C.C. as instructor. and as secretary

violated Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 25(2) GDPR and Section 29(4) of the Finnish Data Protection Act. As a result, and in accordance with Article 58(2)(d)

under Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. The Authority ordered the Health Service to carry out a DPIA and bring its processing operations in line with the GDPR within

monitoring the application of the GDPR and that, in Spain, one of these authorities is the AEPD. Also, according to Article 58(2) GDPR and the provisions of the

COSMOS CALL CENTER SL, with CIF 887708236, whose representative is C.C.C. with DNI ***NIF.2 and telephone number for contact ***TELÉFONO.4, para lo which we

this information request was notified on February 2, 2022, upon being collected by C.C.C. with NIF ***NIF.2 in ***ADDRESS.1, without has received a response

infringement of Article 31 GDPR in conjunction with Article 58(1)(e) GDPR. The AEPD, therefore, agreed to impose a penalty of € 20000 under Article 83(5)(e) GDPR

2016/679. " V Article 58.2 of the RGPD provides the following: “Each control authority will have all of the following corrective powers listed below: C / Jorge

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

space. The DPA found a violation of Article 6(1) GDPR and ordered the controller, pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, to adjust the location of the cameras

15(1)(a)-(h) GDPR. For these reasons, under Article 58 GDPR, the HDPA reprimanded the controller for violating Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 15 GDPR. In addition

specified period (art. 58.2 d)). According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned

in article 58.2 of the GDPR. Between They have the power to impose an administrative fine in accordance with the article 83 of the RGPD -article 58.2 i)-

specified period - article 58. 2 d) -. According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned

authority, are established in article 58.2 of the RGPD. In- Among them are the power to sanction with warning -article 58.2 b) -, the power to impose an

and Article 60 of the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data (Journal of Laws of 2019, item 1781) and pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) in connection

constitute of a breach of Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. Second, the AEPD recalled that, compliant with Article 13(1) and (2) GDPR, and Article 22(4) of the Law on the

foundation was responsible for violating Article 33 GDPR, and issued it with a warning pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. The AEPD did not find the former Secretary

order issued by the Data Inspectorate pursuant to Article 58 (2) of the Data Protection Regulation. 2 (e). The following is a detailed examination of the

authority, are established in article 58.2 of the RGPD. In-Among them are the power to sanction with warning -article 58.2 b) -,C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001

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

the defendant for an infringement of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR a warning penalty in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs

regulated in article 11 of Law 3471/2006 for the protection of personal data in the field of electronic communications. According to this article, such communication

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 that fines

analyzes the criteria by Article 83.2 of the GDPR: - As to the nature and seriousness of the violation [article 83.2 a) of the GDPR], with regard to breaches

specified period - article 58. 2 d) -. According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned

event of an infraction of the precepts of the GDPR. Article 58.2 of the RGPD provides the following: “2 Each supervisory authority shall have all of the

of the provision of Article 58(1) of the GGC, a fine in accordance with the provisions of Article 58(1) of the GGC. 2(i) of the GDPR, the effective, proportionate

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

for in Article 83, paragraph 5, of the Regulation applicable, pursuant to Article 58, paragraph 2, letter i), of the Regulation itself and Article 166, paragraph

control authority, are established in article 58.2 of the RGPD. Between they have the power to direct a warning -article 58.2 b) -, the Power to impose an administrative

CPDP issued NRA an order under Article 58(2)(d) supra Article 57(1)(a) and Article 83(2)(a), (c), (d), (f) and (g) of the GDPR for undertaking suitable technical

referred to in art. 58, paragraph 5, of the Code. 2, of the Regulations, concerning the alleged violations of the 2-ter, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, of the Code

violation of article 5.1.f) of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, a warning sanction and for a violation of article 32 of the GDPR, typified

in Section 2 (2) defined in the General Data Protection Regulation in relation to may apply legal consequences. According to Article 58 (2) of the General

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 58. 1 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD. 2/5 SIXTH: The aforementioned agreement to commence

to B.B.B., for the alleged violation of article 5.1.a) of the RGPD, in accordance with article 83.5.a) and 58.2.b) and d) of the aforementioned RGPD. "

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

in article 58.2 of the GDPR. Between They have the power to impose an administrative fine in accordance with the article 83 of the RGPD -article 58.2 i)-

the completed between the MB and the BF2 Standard data protection clauses in accordance with Article 46 (2) (c) GDPR are supported. also be the additional

mandatory by article 13.2.a) of the GDPR. 2.2 Regarding the exercise of their rights by the persons concerned 67 53. In the context of objective 2, the head

with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 14 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD. In

according to ***URL.2 - gads, expiring on November 2, 2021 and for advertising purposes according to ***URL.2 - _ga, expiring on 2 November 2021 and for

basis in line with Article 13(1)(d) GDPR. The DPA stated that it would impose a fine on the controller, pursuant to Article 58(2)(i) GDPR, if latter does

and professional spheres, to be applicable (see Article 2 and Article 41, paragraph 2, Cost). Niemietz c. Allemagne, 16.12.1992 (Rec. no. 13710/88), spec

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 administrative

with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD SECOND:

RETAIL S.L. for alleged infringement of Article 5.1 f) of the GDPR, in accordance with Article 83.5.a) of the GDPR- Initiate sanctioning procedure against

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), the

specified period - article 58. 2 d) -. According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned

with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD SECOND:

circumstances of the specific case (Article 58, paragraph 2, letter i) of the Regulation). 4. Injunction order. Pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, lett. i) of the Regulations

(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)

authority, are established in article 58.2 of the RGPD. Among them are the power to sanction with warning -article 58.2 b) -, the power to impose an administrative

event of a violation of the precepts of the RGPD. Article 58.2 of the GDPR provides the following: “2 Each supervisory authority will have all of the following

principle to which Article 6(1) GDPR is linked, and imposed a fine of €2000 relying on Article 58(2) GDPR. The defendant ultimately paid €1200 for the breach

constitute a violation of Article 5 (1) (f) of the RGPD? For infringing Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, in conjunction with Article 72(1)(a) LOPDGDD, the Spanish

are established in Article 58.2 of the RGPD.2(b), the power to impose an administrative fine under Article 83 of the GDPR - Article 58(2)(i), or the power

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

in the field in the field called "carbon copy" (C.C.) instead of the "blind carbon copy" field (C.C.N.) . With reference to this matter, the Hospital

as the right to portability of the data; (c) where the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a) the existence of the right to withdraw

provided for in Article 18 GDPR. As explained by the Court, Article 18(1) GDPR, in particular in paragraph (d), is linked to Article 21(1) GDPR, which guarantees

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

whichever is the greater higher amount, in accordance with Article 83.5(b) of the GPRS. However, Article 58(2) of the GPRS provides that: 'Each supervisory authority

2 of the GDPR, and with the provisions of article 76 of the LOPDGDD, with respect to section k) of the aforementioned article 83.2 GDPR. Article 83.2 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

specified in Article 83 of the GDPR. 92. 92. Firstly, the restricted formation emphasises that, in this case, the criterion provided for in Article 83(2)(a) of

context of employment as per Article 88 GDPR. For these reasons, the Garante: - With the power conferred by Article 58(2)(i) GDPR, imposed a fine of €20,000

investigation regarding the violation of Article 15(1)(b) and (c). In accordance with Article 58(2) and Article 83(2), the DPA fined Company A €1,500. Since

powers conferred on each individual by Article 58(2) of the GPRS, the authority, and in accordance with Article 47 of Organic Law 3/2018, of 5 December

with the provisions of article 58.2.i) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 9 of the RGPD, typified in the article 83.5 of the RGPD and for

complied with the principle of data minimization as per Article 5 (1) (c) and Article 25 (2) GDPR? The Finnish DPA held that the controller has not complied

(Art. 58, par. 2, letter i; 83 RGPD) The Municipality of Baronissi appears to have violated articles 5, par. 1, letter a) and c); 6, par. 1, letter c) and

reprimand to the controller in accordance with Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA also ordered the controller to define

signifiesidentified catives (article 83.2 b) Basic personal identifiers -image- are affected (art 83.2g)VOn the other hand, article 83.7 of the RGPD provides

accordance with provided for in article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for an infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, a warning

processing might be based on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR (legitimate interest) and - regarding health data - on Article 9(2)b) GDPR (fulfilling obligations under

provisions of article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, it allows setting a penalty of 2,000 euros (two thousand euros). V Measures Article 58.2 of the GDPR establishes

1 lit. a and c as well as Art. 6 para. 1 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

"active as a journalist" (ECJ, judgement of 16.12.2008 - C-73/07, EuZW 2009, 108 para. 58; v. 14.2.2019 - C-345/17, NVwZ 2019, 465 para. 52). Nor does it depend

with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 5.1 d) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the RGPD and

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

the offense considered in article 72.1.m) of the LOPDGDD, which will be sanctioned, in accordance with art. 58.2 of the GDPR. SECOND: NOTIFY this resolution

PS_00003_2020 1. Claim of C.C.C. 2. Transfer of claim to PLAY ORENES, S.L. 3. Answer to the request of D.D.D. 4. Admission for processing to C.C.C. 5. E / 02186/2019

of an infringement of the Article 5(1)(a) GDPR principle of fairness, and infringements of the Article 5(1)(b) and (c) GDPR principles of purpose limitation

processing involved special categories of data under Article 9 GDPR and whether an exception under Article 9(2) applied; • targeted advertising by the controller

third parties (article 83.2.k, of the RGPD in relationwith article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD)SAWIn accordance with articles 58.2 and 83.2 of the RGPD, previously

57(1)(a), Article 83(1)-(2) and Article 83(6) in connection with Article 58(2)(e) and (i) of the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council

fine based on article 58 paragraph 2 subsection i of the GDPR is appropriate. 27. For Zitatel there is a violation of Article 32 of the GDPR in seven (7)

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

commercial messages. Consequently, pursuant to its powers under Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to take technical and organizational

specified period - article 58. 2 d) -. According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the measure provided for in article 58.2 d) of the aforementioned

controller) under Article 33 GDPR. On the 7 December 2023, the Norwegian DPA imposed a reprimand on the municipality under Article 58(2)(b) GDPR, for processing

other two conditions of Article 6 (1) (f) of the GDPR are not met. (26) The second condition of Article 6 (1) (f) of the GDPR is that the processing of

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

of article 32.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.4.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/9 FIFTH:

information under Article 13 GDPR is illegal. Consequently, the APED decided to issue a fine of €1.500 for the violation of Article 13 GDPR. Share your comments

treatment of these. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 4/13 FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

"accept 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

a violation of Article 12(3) in relation to Article 15 GDPR. The Garante hence applied an administrative fine as per Article 83(5) GDPR. The amount of

complainant as per Article 17 GDPR, as well as his/her right as a consumer to refuse unsolicited commercial phone calls, as per Article 21 GDPR in connection

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

negligence of the offense (article 83.2 b). - Basic personal identifiers (name, data) are affected banks, the line identifier) ​​(article 83.2 g). That is why it

event of an infringement of the precepts of the RGPD. Article 58.2 of the RGPD provides the following: “2 Each supervisory authority shall have all the following

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

Articles 5, par. 1, lett. a) and c); 6, par. 1, lett. c) and e), par. 2 and par. 3, lett. b), of the GDPR; as well as art. 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the

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

street. The DPA was allowed to issue a reprimand, Art. 58(2)(b) GDPR. On the basis of Art. 58(2)(f) GDPR, the DPA was not entitled to order the removal of camera

which Articles 2 (f) 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

lett. a) and c); 6, par. 1, c) and e), par. 2 and par. 3, lett. b); art. 9, par. 1, 2, 4, of the Regulations; art. 2-ter, par. 1 and 3 and 2-septies, par

fine on the defendant and stated he has to comply with Article 5(1)(c) and Article 83(2)(a)(b) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles

with the data protection laws, so, considering that the law [Article 58(2) and Whereas 148 GDPR] also makes possible for the supervisory authorities to decide

the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD recognizes to each control authority, and as established in articles 47 and 48 of the LOPDGDD, C / Jorge Juan, 6

Móviles, S.A, by virtue of the powers established in Article 58.2 of the RGPD and in Articles 47, 64.2 and 68.1 of Organic Law 3/2018, of December 5, on Personal

Protection RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE C.C.C., with NIF *** NIF.1, for a violation of article 5.1.c), typified in article 83.5 of the aforementioned rule, a

[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

Company itself, pursuant to Article 58, paragraph 2, letter i), of the Regulation, Article 166, paragraph 7, of the Code and Article 18 of Law no. 689/1981

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

Public Administration.C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 2 2/8THIRD: On 06/08/2020, in accordance with article 65 of the LOPDGDD

of article 6 of the RGPD typified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. 2. APPOINT D. B.B.B. as instructor. and as secretary to Dña. C.C.C., indicating

reasoned in accordance with Article 4(24) GDPR and, after conducting its own assessment of the factors under Article 83(2) GDPR, found that the proposed fine

violated the provisions of this Regulation" (Article 58.2.b)) and to "impose a fine under Article 83" (Article 58.2.b)).The Commission will be able to impose

relation to letter k) of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, in its Article 76, “Sanctions and corrective measures”, establishes that: “2. According to the

alleged violation of article 5.1f) of the RGPD in relation to the Article 5 of the LOPDGDD, typified in article 83.5 a) of the RGPD. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www

violation of Article 6(1) GDPR? AEPD considered that the documentation provided offers evidence that Vodafone violated Article 6(1) of the GDPR, by processing

violation of the article6.1. of the RGPD, in relation to article 20 e) of the LOPDGDD, typifiedin article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned GDPR.2. TO appoint D

this passage refers to Article 5(2)). The Spanish DPA therefore proposed a fine of €60000 on Vodafone for infringing Article 6(1) GDPR. This was then reduced

party claimant. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 4/12 FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

Pursuant to Article 83 (2), (5) and (7) of the General Data Protection Regulation: “[...] administrative fines in accordance with Article 58 (2) (a) to (h)

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

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

of employees (Article 83 (2) (a) and (k) of the General Data Protection Regulation). The Authority did not consider Article 83 (2) (b), (c), (d), (f), (g)

negligence in the infringement (article 83.2 b).Basic personal identifiers (name, surname,address) (article 83.2 g).C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 -

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

the social and health authority of a city to have breached Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 10 GDPR by requesting data subjects to provide it with personal data

appear in the name of C.C.C. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 4/14 2. That, thanks to friendly talks with C.C.C., the complainant

confidentiality established by Article 5(1)(f) GDPR? Was there a personal data breach? The AEPD considered that there was an infringement of Article 5(1)(f), as there

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

the infringement. In relation to letter k) of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, in its article Article 76, “Sanctions and corrective measures”, establishes

issued by virtue of the power conferred by Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles here! The decision below is a machine

parties (article 83.2.k, of the RGPD in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD). The balance of the circumstances contemplated in article 83.2 of the

D. A.A.A. (hereinafter claimant 1), Ms. B.B.B. (hereafter claimant 2) and D. C.C.C. (hereinafter claimant 3) dated October 24, 2019, November 13, 2019

under Article 5 (1)(e)GDPR, the duty to provide information under Article 13 GDPR, and the obligation to carry out a DPIA under Article 35(3)(b) GDPR. The

certificates. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 6/14 FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

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

4 and article 15 of the GDPR (right of access), for reasons set out below. Furthermore, in accordance with article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and article 95, §

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

complainant, Article 83(2)(h) GDPR - The existence of a prior complaint. Aggravating factors in accordance with Article 72(2)(a) & (b) LOPDGDD and Article 83(2)(k)

violation of article 5.1 a) of the RGPD, ofin accordance with article 83.5 of the RGPD, a fine of APPEARANCE, in accordancewith article 58.2.b) of the RGPD

violation of article 5.1. d) of the RGPD typified in article 83.5 of the aforementioned Regulation (EU) 2016/679. SECOND: APPOINTMENT to C.C.C. and secretary

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

Articles 5.1.b) and 5.1.c) of the GDPR pursuant to Article 95, §1, 3° of the LCA; - pursuant to Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 5° of the LCA

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

infringement of art. 5.1 c) RGPD, offense typified in theart. 83.5 a) RGPD, being punishable in accordance with article 58.2 RGPD.TWO: APPOINT as an instructor

the supervisory authority with pursuant to article 58 (2), or failure to provide access in breach of article 58, Paragraph 1." The defendant could also specify

authorities in the C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/23 article 57.1 and the powers granted in article 58.1 of the Regulation

43; " Article 83.7 of the RGPD indicates: “Without prejudice to the corrective powers of the control authorities by virtue of the Article 58 (2), each

violation of article 6.1. GDPR typified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. 1. APPOINT D. B.B.B. as instructor. and as secretary to Dña. C.C.C., indicated

responding to an email from C.C.C. instead of her alone..." - Sent by D.C.C. to D.D.D. on 28/11/2018: "I confirm that this C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es

allegation. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/5 FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

event of an infringement of the precepts of the GDPR. Article 58.2 of the RGPD provides the following: “2 Each supervisory authority shall have all the following

sanctions (articles 58, par. 2, lett. I and 83 of the Regulations; art. 166, paragraph 7, of the Code). The Guarantor, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, lett. i) and

information”, article 83.2 f) of the GDPR. (IV) "The non-existence of benefits obtained through the infringement", article 83.2 k) of the GDPR and 76.2 c) of the

minimisation principle related, as per Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, and the lack of transparent information, as per Article 12 GDPR. The decision is the consequence

NIF ***NIF.1, in accordance with article 58.2.d) of the GDPR, for a violation of article 13 of the GDPR typified in article 83.5.b) of the aforementioned

subject, and their (c) where the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or Article 6(1)(b) or Article 6(1)(c) of the GDPR Article 9(2)(a), the existence

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

according to Article 12 GDPR and Article 13 GDPR and to maintain a record of the processing activities under its responsibility according to Article 30(1) GDPR

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

the violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and €30,000 for the violation of Article 32 GDPR. According to the national legislation (Article 76(2)(b) LOPDGDDon

moreover, without informing them of their rights under Article 13 of the GDPR. Article 58 of the GDPR, Powers, states: "Each supervisory authority shall have

of a person (article 83.2 b).-Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, a number ofidentification, the line identifier) ​​(article 83.2 g).- Section

agent of *** TELEPHONE. 2 that processed the request to change the owner. FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD recognizes

guaranteesestablished in article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 6 11/6VArticle 58.2 of the RGPD provides

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

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) of

regulation as established in thearticle 2.2 of the RGPD and article 2.2.a) of the LOPDGDD. It says to article 2.2 of the RGPD:"2. This Regulation does not apply

paragraph k) of Article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, Article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", it provides: "In accordance with Article 83(2)(k) of Regulation

according to the article 24.2 of the C.E. This, because according to the SSTC 74/2004 and 175/2005, the principle enshrined in article 24.2 of the C.E. under which

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

pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, of the Regulation to have to: - to impose on Reti Televisive Italiane Spa, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, lett. f), of the

A80907397, for the alleged violation of Article 32 of the RGPD, typified in the Article 83.4 of the GDPR. SECOND: APPOINT C.C.C. as instructor. and, as secretary

the lack of a privacy and cookie policy on a website infringe Article 13 GDPR and Article 22(2) LSSI? The AEPD decided to impose a fine to the clinic: € 2000

statute of limitations, in Article 72.1.b) of the LOPDGDD. V Article 58.2 of the GPRS, under the heading "Powers", states that: "2 Each supervisory authority

valid consent under Article 4(11) GDPR and Article 6(1) LOPDGDD (National data protection law aimed at the implementation of the GDPR). In both articles

information”, article 83.2 f) of the GDPR. (IV) "The non-existence of benefits obtained through the infringement", article 83.2 k) of the GDPR and 76.2 c) of the

there was no justification for this, which constitutes a breach of Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. Furthermore, the nature of the breach is not deemed as grave. However

only with regard to the applications under 2 a), 2 b) and 2 c) and partially with regard to the application under 2 d), so that the remainder of the regional

initial agreement.C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 4 4/8FOUNDATIONS OF LAWIBy virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

" Regarding section k) of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", provides: "2. In accordance with the provisions

data, or in breach of Article 58 (1); 7. Without prejudice to the remedial powers of the supervisory authorities under Article 58 (2), each Member State

of a link to this information. This was a violation of Article 12. Based on Article 13(2)(a) GDPR and WP29 guidelines on transparency, the CNIL noted that

1, lett. a), b) and c); 6, par. 1, lett. c) and e), par. 2 and par. 3, lett. b); 37, para. 1 and 7, of the GDPR; as well as art. 2-ter, paragraphs 1 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

analyzes the criteria set by Article 83.2 of the GDPR: - As to the nature and seriousness of the violation [article 83.2 a) of the GDPR], with regard to breaches

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

out in Article 6 (1) of the GDPR In addition, there is a circumstance within the meaning of Article 9 (2) of the GDPR. (45) Article 9 (2) of the GDPR does

2020.IV Article 83.7 of the RGPD establishes that: “ Without prejudice to the corrective powersof supervisory authorities under Article 58 (2), each Member

the principle of confidentiality, namely Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, and thus, it did not comply with Article 5(2) GDPR referred as the principle of "proactive

(Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 of the Regulation; Article 166(7) of the Code). Pursuant to Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 of the Regulation and Article 166(7) of

gob.es Page 3 3/55 of the LOPDGDD, as indicated in article 83.5 of the RGPD, and article 58.2.b)of the RGPD . "No allegations were received regarding the

entitled to erasure under Article 17(1)(d) GDPR, as the data processing was not lawful. In any case, the requirements of Article 6 GDPR were no longer met 6

infringement of article 6.1 of the RGPD, sanctioned in accordance with the provisions in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned RGPD. 2. APPOINT C.C.C. Instructor

of measures, according to the aforementioned article 58.2 d) of the RGPD. c).- Violation of article 22.2 of the LSSI, due to the deficiencies detected

” Regarding section k) of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", provides: "2. In accordance with the provisions

particular case". According to the provisions of article 83.2 of the GDPR, the measure provided for in article 58.2.d) of the aforementioned Regulation is compatible

the principle of data minimisation - art. 5, § 1, b. "c" of the GDPR, respectively Art. 2, para. 2, item 3 (revoked) of LPPD ,and the processing is excessive

the GDPR. Would judge otherwiseindeed contradict :o the wording of Article L2.2 in conjunction with Article 2.f) of the ePrivacy Directive,o Article 8 of

measures pre-contractual; C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 3/8 (…) " III Sections b), d) and i) of article 58.2 of the RGPD provide

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

violation of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es Page 2 2/6 FOURTH:

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

information provided was in breach of Article 13 GDPR. Therefore, the authority warned the controller (Article 83(5) GDPR) and requested to complete the notice

provisions: (a) Articles 55 (1), 56 (2), 57 (1) (a) and 58 (2) (d) of General Regulation (EU) 2016/679; and (b) of article 19 (5) of Law 125 (I) / 2018, the

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

the violation of article 6 of the RGPD typified in article 83.5.a). REQUIRE: A D.D.D., in accordance with the provisions of article 58.2 d) of the RGPD that

paragraph k) of Article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, Article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", it provides: "In accordance with Article 83(2)(k) of Regulation

violation of article 6.1) typified in the Article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned GDPR. SECOND: APPOINT as instructor D. B.B.B. and as secretary to Ms. C.C.C., indicating

Account". C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 4/19 FUNDAMENTALS OF LAW Yo By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the GDPR recognizes

be 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

raised by D. C.C.C .. Copy of 2 invoices of the claimed in the name of D. C.C.C. with issue dates March 22 and May 22, 2019 respectively. C / Jorge Juan

right to data portability; c) when the treatment is based on article 6, paragraph 1, letter a), or the Article 9, paragraph 2, letter a), the existence

law recognizes in its article 8.1. C) the right to receive theinformation that your union sends you and in the same article, section 2.a),recognizes the right

to Article 83(2)(k) of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, in its Article 76, "Penalties and corrective measures", states that: "In accordance with Article 83(2)(k)

the rights recognized in articles 15 to 22 GDPR FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD recognizes to each control authority

regard to Article 83.2(k) of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, in its Article 76, "Sanctions and remedial measures", provides that "In accordance with Article 83(2)(k)

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

sanctions (articles 58, par. 2, lett. I and 83 of the Regulation; art. 166, paragraph 7, of the Code) The Guarantor, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, lett. i), and

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

violating Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, the DPA fined the controller €50,000. In its assessment of the fine, the DPA noted three aggravating factors per Article 83(2)