Search results

that the action was intentional (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR), and that the personal data are sensitive (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR). Share your comments here! Share

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

action (Article 83.2 b) Basic personal identifiers (name, surname, address) are affected, according to Article 83(2)(g) VII Furthermore, Article 83.7 of the

limitation period, article 72 of the LOPDGDD indicates: Article 72. Infractions considered very serious. "1. Based on the provisions of article 83.5 of Regulation

negligence of the infringement (83 (2) (b) GDPR) and the lack of cooperation with the Spanish Data Protection Agency (83 (2) (f) GDPR). Therefore, in view of the

significant negligent action (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR) and that basic personal identifiers were affected (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR). The economic volume of the

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

signifies cativa (article 83.2 b)  Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, surname, two, domicile), according to article 83.2 g) Therefore, based

negligent action (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR), and for being data known as basic personal identifiers such as name and address (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR). The AEPD set

data. Hence, it considered Article 32(1)(a), Article 32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(d) GDPR to be breached. Pursuant to Article 82(2) GDPR, the DPA took several aggravating

such processing to be legitimate on the basis of Article 9 (2) (B) GDPR in conjunction with Article 32 GDPR" (see note cited, p. 4) (see footnote cit., p

the infringement - Article 83(2)(b) - and the fact that the infringement involved the “basic identifiers” of the claimant - Article 83(2)(g) - to be aggravating

aggravated by article 83(2)(b) GDPR (intentional or negligent character of the infringement) and article 83(2)(k) GDPR in relation with article 76(f) of Spanish

criteria provided for by Article 83(2) GDPR and ensuring it is effective, proportionate and dissuasive in line with Article 83(1) GDPR. Adopted 117 10 BINDING

with the criteria established in Article 83(2)(b) GDPR: negligent character of the infringement, and Article 83(2)(g) GDPR: categories of personal data affected

negligent action (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR) and that basic identifiers such as name, surname, and address are affected (Article 83(2)(g) GDPR), including also

health data under Article 14 GDPR#15Article 4(15) GDPR, to the municipality. In particular, the controller could not invoke Article 9(2)(f) GDPR ("necessary

limitation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR and against the provisions of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 6(1)(f) GDPR in conjunction with Article 6(4) GDPR. Further

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

to Article 58 Paragraph 2 Letter i and Article 83 Paragraph 1 to 6 GDPR Article 58 Paragraph 2 Litera i and Article 83 Paragraph One , up to 6 GDPR are

14/19 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

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

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

committed by the complainant (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR).The violation was intentionally committed by the complainant (Article 83(2)(b) GDPR). The following was taken

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

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)

application, see Article 3(2)(b) GDPR, or automated decision making, see Article 22 GDPR. Profiling also triggers information duties under Articles 13(2)(f) and

by Article 83(2)(b) GDPR, and also the link between the company's activity and the processing of personal data, as provided for by Article 76(2)(b) GDPR

Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 32 GDPR, p. 636 (Oxford University Press 2020). Jandt, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 32 GDPR, margin number

Member States, in Articles 83(1) to (6) of the GDPR. Second, Article 83(2)(b) GDPR, read in conjunction with Article 83(3) GDPR, both describe the intentional

statement of the Debtor [Article 83 (2) (k) GDPR]; - the processing did not affect specific categories of personal data [Article 83 (2) GDPR paragraph (g)]; -

the performance of a contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR) and for legitimate interest (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR). Article 6(1)(b) GDPR In its original draft decision

prescription in article 72.1.b) of the LOPDGDD, a fine of 12,000 euros, of in accordance with articles 83.2 a), b) d) of the RGPD and 76.2.a) of the LOPDGDD

Authority. II.5.2. Established infringement of Article 5(1)(a) j° Article 6(1)(f) and Article 12(2) GDPR in conjunction with Article 17 (1) GDPR. II.5.2.1. Administrative

obligor.[Article 83(2)(b) GDPR] - The obligor has not yet been convicted for violating the General Data Protection Regulation.[Article 83(2)(e) GDPR] - The

(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)

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

contemplated in article 83.2 of the GDPR and the Article 76.2 of the LOPDGDD, with respect to the offense committed by violating the established in article 6.1 of

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

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

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

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

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

established by Article 83(1) GDPR and taking into account the criteria of Article 83(2) GDPR. This decision is the first decision of the EDPC under Article 65(1)

issued its Guidelines 2/2019 on the processing of personal data under Article 6(1)(b) GDPR with a detailed analysis of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR. General information

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

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

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

reliance on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR or at least exercise the right to object under Article 21 GDPR. If the legal basis is Article 6(1)(f) GDPR (i.e. 'legitimate

the GDPR: i. Articles 5.1.a) and 5.2, as well as Article 6.1 GDPR; ii. Articles 12.1 and 12.2, Article 15.1, Article 5.2, Article 24.1, and Article 25.1

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

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

of: 1. Article 5 (1) (a) and (2) and Article 6 (1) GDPR; 2. Article 5, Article 24 (1) and 25 (1) and (2) GDPR; 3. Article 12 paragraph 1, paragraph 2, paragraph

commentary on Article 13(2)(b) GDPR. Given the identical wording, see commentary on Article 13(2)(c) GDPR. Given the identical wording, see commentary on Article

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

categories. Similar to the ex-ante information in Article 13(2)(b) and 14(2)(c) GDPR, Article 15(1)(e) GDPR required to inform the data subject about the right

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

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

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

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

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

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

elements in Article 2(1) are fulfilled, the GDPR applies unless the processing falls under one of the exemptions named in Article 2(2)(a) to (d) GDPR. The first

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

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

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

criteria established in the section 2 of the aforementioned article. 2. In accordance with the provisions of article 83.2.k) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, also

constitutes a special category of personal data under Article 9(1) GDPR, explicit consent (Article 9(2)(a) GDPR) would have been necessary for part of the processing

liability 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

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

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

similar to the ones laid out by Article 50 GDPR. Article 50 GDPR is divided in two different parts: letters (a) and (b) aim for cooperation with other

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

subject to processing, as described in Article 3(2)(a) and (b) GDPR. Common Misunderstanding: The application of the GDPR does in no way depend on the citizenship

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

Chair represents the Board (Article 68(2) GDPR) and is responsible for directing the work of the secretariat (Article 75(2) GDPR). Other specific responsibilities

on Article 36(4), it is still disputed whether the outcome of the procedure rather resembles that of Article 58(3)(a) GDPR or Article 58(3)(b) GDPR. See

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

Commentary. Article 54(1)(b) GDPR echoes Article 53(2) GDPR, which outlines the qualificatory and experiential requirements for SA members. However, unlike Article

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

unlike delegated acts made under Article 92 GDPR. Article 93(2) GDPR explicitly provides for the application of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011

with the support of the EDPB in accordance with Article 70(1)(b) GDPR. According to Article 45(5) GDPR, the continued monitoring referred to in paragraph

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

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

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

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

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 carried

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

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

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

according to Article 58 Paragraph 2 Letter i and Article 83 Paragraph 1 to 6 GDPR Article 58 Paragraph 2 Litera i and Article 83 Paragraph One , to 6 GDPR are 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

..............69 B.2.2. - Determining the purposes ofthe processingofpersonal datawithin the TCF...............................71 B.2.3. - Determiningthe

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

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

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

of article 35 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.4.a) of the GDPR and article 73.t) of the LOPDGDD” "For the purposes specified in the art. 64.2 b) of

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

and Article 5, Chapter IV and Article 83. The relevant obligations 2.5. Chapter 1 GDPR sets out the general provisions. Article 5 of Chapter I GDPR sets

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

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%

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

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 AEPD

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

SECOND: NOTIFY this resolution to B.B.B.. THIRD: ORDER to B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, which by virtue of article 58.2.d) of the RGPD, within a period of

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

IMPOSE COMMUNITY OWNERS B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, a fine of ONE THOUSAND

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

and (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)

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

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

IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 6.1 and another of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 letters a) and b) of the

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

with NIF ***NIF.1, for the alleged violation of Article 13 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SECOND: APPOINT R.R.R. as instructor. and, as

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

Agency RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for an infraction of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, a fine of €10

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

same Article 83. Article 83 of the GDMP provides thatEach enforcement authority shall ensure that administrative fines imposed under this Article for violations

of paragraphs 1 and 2 and paragraph 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

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

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)

personal data", circumstance provided for in article 76.2.b) LOPDGDD in connection with article 83.2.k) GDPR. The business activity of the defendant necessarily

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

the violation of the GDPR: violation of article 6.1, violation typified in its article 83.5.a). IV Secondly, article 32 of the GDPR “Security of processing”

of personal data of clients or third parties (article 83.2.k, of the GDPR in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD). The Judgment of the National

following criteria established by article 83.2 of the RGPD, considering as aggravating circumstance according to article 76.2 b) LOPDGDD, the relationship of

provisions of article 83.1 of the GDPR. In order to determine the administrative fine to be imposed, the provisions of article 83.2 of the GDPR and article 76 of

” 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

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

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

follows: “B.B.B.” (link 9), “B.B.B.” (link 10), “B.B.B.” (links 11) and “B.B.B.” (link 12). The link address shows “B.B.B.” (link 9), “B.B.B.” (links 10

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,

compliance and accountability with the principles of Article 5(1) and par.2 in conjunction with Article 6(1) GDPR. B. imposes on NEW YORK COLLEGE S.A. the effective

taken up again at Article 5.1(b) of the GDPR under the Principles for the Processing of Personal Data (Chapter II). 16. Article 5.1(b) of the GDMP provides

particular". 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

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)

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

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

2019, BVwerG 6 C 2.18 "It follows that the opening clauses of Article 6.2 and 6.3 GDPR for processing operations under Article 6.1(1)(e) GDPR do not cover

same article 83. 40. Article 83 of the GDPR provides: 1. Each supervisory authority shall ensure that administrative fines imposed under this Article for

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

proportionate and dissuasive. The stated in Article 83.1 of the Data Protection Regulation. In article 83.2 of the data protection regulation, the factors

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

in particular of children was in breach of Article 5, Article 6, Article 8, Article 9, and Article 25 GDPR. Consequently, the DPA urgently imposed upon

***EMAIL.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

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

(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

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

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

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

1 of the Personal Data Act, cf. the Privacy Ordinance, Article 58 no. 2 letter i, cf. article 83, is imposed on Coop Finnmark SA, org.nr. 981 397 568, to

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

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

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

diligence is expected from it (Article 83(2)(k) of the GDR). 176. The Litigation Chamber further recalls that, under Article 83(5)(b) of the GDR, it provides

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

the OCE informs that on 2 April 2019 the mandatory copy of the Electoral Census had been delivered to its representative, Mr. B.B.B, for the purposes provided

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

Ordinance Article 6 No. 1 letter f, for failure to assess protests, cf. Article 21, and for lack of information, cf. Article 13. 2. Pursuant to Article 58 (2)

montant de 10.000 € (article 83, paragraphe 2, de l'AVG ; article 100, §1, 13° WOG et article 101 WOG). 129. Compte tenu de l'article 83 AVG et de la jurisprudence17

within the meaning of Art. 83(2)(b) GDPR. 69 In the opinion of the Senate, the review and deletion periods under section II.2.b) of the Rules of Conduct

infringement (article 83.2 b) of the RGPD) and degree of BBVA's responsibility taking into account technical or organizational measures applied (article 83.2 d) of

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

violation committed by the Center of Registers listed in Article 83(2) (b), (c), (e), (f) and (h) GDPR, i. e. the absence of intent, the efforts made to restore

Agency sanction B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of article 6 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, with a fine of €2,000 (two thousand

relation 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)

Agency RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD, a fine of €10

..................... .14 2.2.1 Applicable regulations, etc. ................................................... ...14 2.2.2 The Privacy Protection Authority's

of EUR 2,000 (two thousand euros) on B.B.B., with IFRN ***NIF.1, for an infringement of Article 32 GDPR, as defined in Article 83.4 of the GDPR. SECOND:Notify

(f), 9 and 32(1)(b) GDPR.” Pursuant to Article 58(2)(i), the DPA hence imposed an administrative fine as per Article 83(4) and (5) GDPR. Given that the

infringement typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD, the following mitigating factors: - The claimed one does not have previous infringements (83.2 e) RGPD). - It

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)

for the 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

allegations of D. B.B.B. exceed the jurisdiction of the Board, being able to go to court. The complaining party states that D. B.B.B. cannot access the

by the alleged violation of Article 5.1(f) of the GDPR, Article 5.1(b) of the GDPR, as set out in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FOURTH: On 10 June 2020, the

and mitigate its effects (article 83.2.f, of the RGPD) -Basic personal identifiers (name, surname, address, D.N.I.) (article 83.2 g). Therefore, in accordance

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

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

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

for the violation of Article 6 GDPR and € 4 000 for the violation of article 13, under the power conferred by Article 83(5) GDPR. Share your comments here

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

and payroll of Ms. B.B.B.  November 8, 2018 – D. D.D.D. (Brother of the claimant) send by mail the income 2017 (model100) from Ms. B.B.B..  November 9,

Controller A and B should have responded positively to the request of the Complainant in accordance with Article 12(2) GDPR and Article 15 GDPR. The HDPA imposed

to in Article 58(2) of the Regulation are not met’. The Authority then imposed an administrative fine to the USL as per Articles 83(5)(b) and 83(4)(a)

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

against the controller. Based on Article 72(1)(b) of the national data protection law, and Articles 83(1) and 83(2) GDPR, the DPA considered aggravating

defendant is defined in Articles 83.4.a) and 83.4.b) respectively. 83.5.a) of the RGPD, precepts that they establish: Article 83.4: "Violations of the following

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

the respondent, by the alleged violation of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, as defined in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SIXTH: Formal notification of the agreement

claimed entity has no previous infractions (83.2 e) RGPD). - She has not obtained direct benefits (83.2 k) RGPD and 76.2.c) LOPDGDD). - The Respondent is not

Guarantee of Digital Rights (Article 32.2). In determining the fine, the following aggravating factors under Article 83 GDPR were considered: unintentional

alleged 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.

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

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 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

reasons, Company B was found to be in breach of Article 32 GDPR. The Luxembourg DPA issued a fine of €5,330 under Article 83(2) GDPR, ordered the Company

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.

effects (article 83.2.f of the GDPR) 4.1.12. Likewise, the Contentious Chamber did not take into consideration the cooperation of X (article 83.2 f). From

violation of article 6. of the GDPR. In order to determine the administrative fine to be imposed, the provisions of articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD must

P3002000B, for an infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD, a warning sanction in accordance with article 77.2 of the

infringement of article 5.1(b), as defined in Article 83(5)(a) and considered for the purposes of the statute of limitations in Article 72(1)(a), a fine

ORDER B.B.B., with 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

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

RESOLVES: FIRST: TO IMPOSE on B.B.B., 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

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

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

Administrator of D. B.B.B., the company has not changed their legal representatives. FOUNDATIONS OF LAW I By virtue of the powers that article 58.2 of the RGPD

infringing article 5(3) GDPR which enshrines the principle of data minimisation. The AEPD examined a complaint submitted by miss A.A.A against mr. B.B.B. for

scale due to the number of clients it has (article 83.2 a).  Basic personal identifiers are affected (article 83.2 g) Therefore, in accordance with the applicable

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

interested parties (art.83.2. c) of the RGPD). Aggravating factors: - The intentionality or negligence of the infringement (article 83.2. B) of the RGPD). - Basic

Protection Regulation (Article 83 (2) (e) of the General Data Protection Regulation). circumstances within the meaning of Article 2 (2) (b), (f), (g), (h), (i)

" 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

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

elements provided for in Article 83.2 of the GDPR: - As to the nature and seriousness of the violation (Article 83.2.a) of the GDPR), it is that with respect

the criteria in Article 83 (2) sentence 2 GDPR. In this case, the fact-based assessment criteria in Article 83 (2) sentence 2 of the GDPR take precedence

to B.B.B.. C/ Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 – Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 10/11 THIRD: ORDER to B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, which by virtue of article 58.2

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

infringement.In relation to Article 83(2)(k) of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, in its Article 76, "Sanctions and corrective measures", states that: "2. In accordance with

Agency RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for an infraction of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a fine of €1

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

negligent action, but significant (article 83.2 b) - Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, surname, address) (article 83.2 g) -The evident link between

serious negligent action (article 83.2 b). Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, surname, mobile phone number) (article 83.2 g). The evident link between

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

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

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

entering the recipients in the specific field of the emails (Article 83, paragraph 2, letter b) of the Regulation); the Hospital has taken charge of the problem

accordance with article 83.5 of the RGPD. 7th In order to determine the administrative fines to be imposed, the provisions of articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD

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

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

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

controller had violated Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, Article 17(1) GDPR, Article 25(1) GDPR, Article 32(1) GDPR and Article 32(2) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued

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

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

significant negligent action identified (Art. 83 (2) (b) GDPR). -basic personal affected (Art. 83 (2) (g) GDPR). -Actions previously committed, as this is

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

with NIF P3120800B, for the alleged violation of article 5.1.b) in relation to article 6.4 of the RGPD, in accordance with article 83.5.a) of the RGPD

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

alleged infringement of article 5.1.c) of the RGPD and article 13 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 a) and b) of the GDPR. FIFTH: On 12/17/2021 the

carried out by the claimed (article 83.2. a) of the RGPD). - The intentionality or negligence of the infringement (article 83.2. B) of the RGPD). - Basic personal

serious negligent action (article 83.2 b). -Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, surname, mobile phone number) (article 83.2 g). -The obvious link

parties (Article 83.2.k of the RGPD in relation to Article 76.2.b of the LOPDGDD) - The turnover or activity figure of the entity (article 83.2.a, of the

signifies cativa (article 83.2 b).  Basic personal identifiers are affected, (name, surname, two, domicile) (according to article 83.2g). Therefore, based

criteria under Art. 83(2)(b) (intentional or negligent character of the infringement) and (e) (previous infringements) of the GDPR. For these reasons,

art. 32 sec. 2, art. 38 sec. 1, art. 39 sec. 1 lit. b and art. 39 sec. 2, art. 30 sec. 1 lit. d, as well as art. 83 sec. 1 - 3, art. 83 sec. 4 letter

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

6, paragraph 1, letter c) and e); paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, letter b) of the RGPD, as well as Article 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Code in the

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

sedeagpd.gob.es 10/14 claimed (article 83.2. a) of the RGPD). - The intentionality or negligence of the infringement (article 83.2. B) of the RGPD). - Basic personal

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

the complaint (Article 83 (2) (f) GDPR), not linking the activity of the offender to the processing of personal data (Article 76 (2) (b) LOPDGD), the non-existence

The RGPD, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 83 thereof, provides in its Article 58(2)(b) the possibility of using the warning to correct treatment

Based information provided and the authority granted by Article 58 and 83 GDPR, as well as Article 24(b) of National Law 125(I)/2018, the DPA came to the following

managed for, as this is the business of the company (Article 83.2.k of the RGPD in relation to Article 76.2.b of the LOPDGDD) The following circumstances would

employees. The DPA found a violation of Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Following a visit to the premises of two public bodies (the

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

were used (Article 83.2.b, RGPD). -The close connection of the activity of the respondent with the processing of personal data (Article 83.2.k, RGPD in

in article 83.5.b) of the RGPD: -The claimed entity does not have previous infringements (83.2 e) RGPD). -It has not obtained direct benefits (83.2 k)

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

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

claimed entity has no previous infractions (83.2 e) RGPD). - She has not obtained direct benefits (83.2 k) RGPD and 76.2.c) LOPDGDD). - The Respondent is not

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

object (Article 21 GDPR) and the right to erasure (Article 17 GDPR) of data subjects. Therefore the controller was not found in breach of Article 25(2) GDPR

parties (Article 83.2.k of the RGPD in relation to Article 76.2.b of the LOPDGDD) The balance of the circumstances referred to in Article 83.2 of the RGPD

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

for the alleged violation of Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR and Article 32 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notified of the aforementioned

lack of diligence of the claimed (article 83.2.b, RGPD). - Basic personal identifiers are affected (personal data (art.83.2. g) of the RGPD). - The evident

that the letter in question referred to Article 58(1)(a) of the GDPR and Article 5:16 in conjunction with Article 5:17 of the Awb does not make this any

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

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

conversation and the phone number -E.E.E.-Can you prove that you are B.B.B. , answer Well look for B.B.B. that I am I. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid

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

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 the article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, infringement typified in its article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned regulation. IV. Article 83.5 a) of the GDPR, considers

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

regard to paragraph (k) of Article 83.2 of the GDPR, the LOPDGDD, Article 76, 'Sanctions and corrective measures', provides: '2.k) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679

of the mentioned article 83.2 RGPD.Consequently, the following facts have been taken into account as aggravating factors:-Art. 83.2 b) RGPD: the intentionality

processing of data concerning health laid down in Article 9(1) GDPR is possible under Article 9(2)(h) GDPR) in a case such as the present one, are there further

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)

analyzes the criteria set by article 83.2 of the GDPR: - As for the nature and seriousness of the violation (article 83.2 a) of the GDPR), it recalls in with regard

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

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 sanction

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

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

fine, the criteria specified in the same Article 83”. 138. Article 83 of the GDPR, as referred to in Article 20, paragraph III, of the "Informatique et

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

RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE Ms. B.B.B., with NIF *** NIF.2, for a violation of Article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a warning sanction

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

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

diligence of the claimed party (article 83.2.b, RGPD). - Basic personal identifiers are affected (personal data (art.83.2. g) of the RGPD). - The evident

Protection Agency sanction B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 13 of the RGPD, typified in the Article 83.5 of the RGPD, with a fine

Consequently, based on Article 83(5)(a) GDPR, the hospital was fined to pay a fine of EUR 30.000,00 for violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR. Corrective measures

Complainant's personal data. 2. the intentional or unintentional nature of the breach (Article 83(2)(b) of Regulation 2016/679). The Article 29 Working Party, in

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

of personal data of clients or third parties (article 83.2.k, of the RGPD in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD) It is appropriate to graduate

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

following criteria established by article 83.2 of the RGPD, considering as aggravating circumstance according to article 76.2 b) LOPDGDD, the relationship of

for which you are responsible, typified in article 83.5.b) RGPD, the provisions of articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD must be observed, precepts that state:

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

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

other legal basis for processing under Article 6 GDPR, the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) and Article 6(1) GDPR. Taking into account the low income

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

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

number of personal data. (Article 76.2.b) The balance of the circumstances contemplated in article 83.2 of the RGPD and the Article 76.2 of the LOPDGDD, with

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

action (art. 83 (2) (b) GDPR). The AEPD became aware of the infringement through the complainant's filing of a complaint (Art. 83 (2) (h) GDPR). Share your

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

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

points b) and d) and article 83, paragraph 4, al. a), all documented regulation.-In addition, under the terms of article 83, paragraph 3 of the GDPR, the

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

or negligence of the offense (article 83.2 b).-Basic personal identifiers (name, surname, NIF) are affected(article 83.2 g).That is why it is considered

of personal data of clients or third parties (article 83.2.k, of the GDPR in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD). The Judgment of the National

Personal Data Act § 26 second paragraph, cf. Article 58 (2) (i) of the Privacy Regulation, cf. Article 83, to pay a infringement fee to the Treasury of

relevant circumstances set out in Article 83.2 of the GDPR:(a) processing of the complainant’s data has been carried out locally;(b) There is no intention on the

paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, letter b) of the Regulation; 9, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, of the Regulation, Articles 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3 and 2-septies, paragraph

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

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

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

Articles 5(1)(a) GDPR and 13 GDPR. On the other hand, they disagreed with the infringement of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR in relation to Article 9(1) GDPR with regard

down in Article 83 (2) GDPR: As aggravating factors: • In this case, negligent action is not intentional, but it is significant (Article 83 (¬2) (b)). • There

significant (article 83.2 b). - The duration of the illegitimate treatment of the data of the affected party carried out by the claimed (article 83.2 d). That

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

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:

requirements, in violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, letter c) and e), paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, letter b), of the Regulation and Article 19, paragraph 3, of

the lack of security routines, thus breaching Article 32(1)(b) cf. Article 5 GDPR, Article 35 and Article 24(1), respectively. Teachers at two junior high

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)

significant negligent action (article 83.2 b).  Basic personal identifiers are affected, according to the article 83.2g). Therefore, in accordance with

or of the Member States ”. The violation of article 32 is classified in article 83.4.a) of the cited GDPR in the following terms: "4. Violations of the

elements provided for in Article 83.2 of the GDPR:  As to the nature and seriousness of the violation (article 83.2.a) of the GDPR), the Restricted Training

the provisions of article 83.2.k) of Regulation (EU)2016/679 may also be taken into account:a) The continuing nature of the offense.b) The linking of the

provided for in Article 83.5.b) in relation to Article 13; and third, an infringement provided for in Article 83.4.a) in relation to Article 28 all of them

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

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

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

have entered into a breacha / 'article 14.1-2 combined' article 12.3, article 6, article 5.1, c) and articles 5.2 and 24.1-2 of the RGPO. It is therefore

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

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 sanctions

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

violation of article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR. C / Jorge Juan, 6 www.aepd.es 28001 - Madrid sedeagpd.gob.es 2/5 FOURTH: On

of the GDPR, when proceed, in a certain way and within a specified period -article 58. 2 d) -. In accordance with the provisions of article 83.2 of the

the number of data subjects (Article 83.2.a) of the GDPR), the As for the number of data subjects (Article 83.2.a) of the GDPR), the Panel notes that these

"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

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

infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.b) of theRGPD, a warning sanction in accordance with article 58.2.b) of theRGPD.SECOND: REQUEST

” 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

but significant (article 83.2 b)  Basic personal identifiers are affected, in this case the image of the minor, according to article 83.2 g). Therefore,

significant (article 83.2 b). - Basic personal identifiers (name, an identification number, the line identifier) are affected (article 83.2 g). - Any previously

Articles 13 GDPR and 7 GDPR respectively? To determine the amount of the penalty, the AEPD took into account three criteria in Article 83(2) GDPR: unintentional

Articles 6 and 13 GDPR? The AEPD decided to impose, for infringement of Article 6 GDPR, a fine of € 10000 and, for infringement of Article 13 GDPR, a fine of

high (Article 83 (2 ) (a) of Regulation 2016/679); b) relevant previous violations of the provisions of Regulation 2016/679 by the Company (Article 83 (2

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

Secondly, under Article 83 of the GDPR: "1. Each supervisory authority shall ensure that administrative fines imposed under this article for violations

pursuant to Art. 14 par. 5 lit. b GDPR? The President of UODO found that: 1) The applicable provision is the Art. 14 GDPR since the data controller collects

established by article 83.2 of the RGPD:As aggravating the following:We are facing unintentional, but significant negligent action(article 83.2 b)Basic personal

unintentional but significant negligent action (Article 83.2 b) Basic personal identifiers are affected, according to the 83.2g) Therefore, in accordance with the

interests 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)

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

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

imposition of measures, according to article 58.2 d) of the GDPR. Along with it and In accordance with article 58.2 of the GDPR, it was also indicated that the

11, 148, 150, and Article 5, Chapter IV and Article 83. 4 2.8 Chapter IV, Section 2 addresses security of personal data. Article 32 GDPR provides: 1. Taking

Subject: IRREVOCABLE DIMITION A.A.A. AND B.B.B. OF FOUNDATION SYNDROME 5P To: A.A.A. < ***EMAIL.1> , AA B.B.B. ***EMAIL.2 • The Foundation has written to the

significant (article 83.2 b) Basic personal identifiers (name, an identification number, the line identifier) are affected, according to article 83.2 g) • •

identified significant (Article 83(2)(b)) Basic personal identifiers are affected (name, surname), in accordance with Article 83(2)(g) Therefore, in accordance

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)

es 11/20 RGPD, and article 74.k) of the LOPDGDD, a fine of 100,000 euros, of in accordance with article 83.2.a) of the RGPD and 76.2.b) of the LOPDGDD.)

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

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

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

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

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

e), par. 2 and par. 3, lett. b), of the GDPR; as well as art. 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Code (see also the provision contained in Article 15, paragraph

(art.83, par.2 , letters b), d) and g) of the Regulation. On the other hand, pursuant to letters a) and c) of the aforementioned art. 83, par. 2, it was

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

in article 83.2 of the RGPD: As aggravating criteria: - Basic personal identifiers are affected (names and photographs of three people) (article 83.2 g)

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

basis of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR: “...there is a risk that the Draft Decision’s failure to establish Whatsapp IE's infringement of Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, pursuant

whichever is higher, is applied. With reference to the elements listed in Article 83(2) of the Regulation for the purposes of the application of the pecuniary

Finnish DPA found a retail chain to have breached Article 5(1)(e) GDPR, Article 25(1) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR for its lengthy storage of purchase behaviour

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

the Authority judged the processing unlawful on the basis of Article 6 (1) (c) (e), (2), (3) (b). Also, the Garante found that the personal data published

for an infringement of article 14 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5 of the RGPD, a warning sanction, in in relation to article 74.a) of the LOPDGDD.

protection. /Article 6.1 c) Ju in combination with Article 6.3 of the GDPR. b) Violation of Articles 5.1.a}, 12.1, 13.lc}, 13.2.a}, 13.2.d}, and 13.2.e}, for

ADDRESS B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of article 13 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5.b) of the GDPR, a warning. SECOND: TO ORDER B.B.B., with

2019, item 1781) in connection with Article 31, Article 58(1)(e) in connection with Article 83(1-3) and Article 83(5)(e) of Regulation 2016/679 of the

into account and issued a fine of €2,000 for the violation of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR as classified under Article 83(5) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share

significant negligent action (article 83.2 b) - Basic personal identifiers (name, surname, address) are affected, according to Article 83(2)(g) Therefore, on the

private 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)

third parties (article 83.2.k, of the RGPD in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD) The continued nature of the infraction (article 83.2.k of the RGPD

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

Regulation (RGPD), and Article 7 of the LOPDGDD, as defined in Article 83(5) of the RGPD, a warning sanction provided for in Article 58(2)(b) of the RGPD) SECOND:

provisions of the GDPR, whenproceed, in a certain way and within a specified period -article 58. 2d) -.In accordance with the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD

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

sanctioned for violation of article 13 of the RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a) of the RGPD, with warning of in accordance with article 58.2.b) of the RGPD. After

graduation established in section 2 of the aforementioned article. 2. In accordance with the provisions of article 83.2.k) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679

sec. 1 and art. 34 sec. 1 and 2 of Regulation 2016/679. 2) Intentional or unintentional nature of the breach (Article 83(2)(b) of Regulation 2016/679) - the

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,

circumstances referred to in Article 83(2) of the RGPD, with with regard to the infringement committed in breach of the provisions of Article 13 thereof allows set

RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE Don B.B.B., with NIF *** NIF.1, for a violation of Article 5.1.c) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a fine 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

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

Spanish City Council with a warning of an infringement of Article 5(1)(c) pursuant to Article 83(5) over installed surveillance cameras in the City Hall

the company comply with the Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR, as well as with the rest provisions of Article 5(1) GDPR and d) issued a fine EUR

of Article 83(2) and recital 148 of the Rules of Procedure and that, therefore, it may be sufficient to admonish Iliad, pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) of

perpetrator (Article 83(2) GDPR). Lastly, the amount of the fine shall not exceed the maximum amounts provided for in Articles 83(4) (5) and (6) GDPR. The quantification

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:

diligence through an employee regarding the completion of the contract (article 83.2.b of the RGPD). The mere coincidence of name and surname does not justify

violation of art. 2-ter, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Code and art. 6, par. 1, lett. c) and e); par. 2 and par. 3, lett. b), of the GDPR; b) in a manner that

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

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

conjunction with Article 62 (1) 4 DSG and for the period prior to 25 May 2018 against Article 52 Paragraph 2 no. 7 in conjunction with § 50b par. 2 DSG 2000.

relation to Article 6(1)(a) GDPR since the consent could not be considered valid. Finally, the DPA applied two aggravating circumstances of Article 83(2) GDPR:

of APERCIBIMENTO 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

Protection, pursuant to Article 83(3) and Article 83(4)(a) and Article 83(5)(e) of Regulation 2016/679, in conjunction with Article 103 of the Personal Data

infringement of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, a warning sanction in accordance with the provisions of Article 77.2 of the LOPDGDD

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

publication of their data under Article 9(2)(a) GDPR and there was no other legal basis for the processing under Article 9(2) GDPR. Consequently, the DSB issued

intervention Article 58 (2) (i) and Article 83 (2) state that the IMY has the power to impose administrative penalty fees in accordance with Article 83. the circumstances

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

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

acquittal. " V However, what is established in article 83.5, sections a) and b), of the RGPD, its art. 58.2 b) provides the possibility of sanctioning with

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

Debtor pursuant to Article 58 (2) (b) of the General Data Protection Regulation because its data processing activities violated Article 5 (1) (d) of the

for the alleged violation of Article 6 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 a) of the RGPD in relation to article 72.1 b) of the LOPDGDD. FIFTH: The Agreement

faced with unintentional negligent action, butsignificant identified (article 83.2 b)C / Jorge Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 7 11/7Basic

accordance with article 15 AVG (section 2.1) - data processing officer (section 2.2) - cookie policy (section 2.3) - health data processing (section 2.4) - camera

procedure to the claimed, by the alleged violation of Article 6 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 b) of the RGPD. SIXTH: Notified the initiation agreement

and services". B. On the breach of the obligation to inform pursuant to Article 14 of the GDPR 20. According to Article 14 of the GDPR: 1. Where personal

" Under Article 83 (2), (5) and (7) of the General Data Protection Regulation: administrative fines in accordance with Article 58 (2) (a) to (b), depending

32 para 1, 56 para 2, 57 para 1 of the Administrative Criminal Act 1991 - VStG, Federal Law Gazette No 52/1991 as amended; Article 82 para 6 of Regulation

assessment pursuant to Article 83. On this basis, the tribunal has assessed whether a reprimand pursuant to Article 58 no. 2 letter b, cf. 83 no. 2 would have been

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

administrative fine in the amount of 2,000,000 ISK on the controller under Article 83(2)(a) GDPR and Article 83(2)(g) GDPR. This is just one of five decisions

criteria established in Article 83.2 of the RGPD: As aggravating criteria: - Intentionality or negligence in the infringement (paragraph b). - For other previous

” 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

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

Authority of Bologna for violation of Articles 5(2)(f) and 9 GDPR. On the basis of Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 GDPR, the Garante imposed a fine of € 18 000 on the

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

limitation under Article 5(1)(a) of the GDPR. 1(b) and the obligation (principle) of accountability under Article 5(1)(b). 2 of the GDPR, that is to say

scalethe by the number of clients it has (article 83.2 a)Basic personal identifiers are affected (article 83.2 g)Therefore, in accordance with the applicable

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

violation of Article 5(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) GDPR. Furthermore, there was no legal basis for these processing operations under Article 6(1) GDPR. The DPA

controller HRK 2.15 million (approximately €283,000). It held that the controller violated Articles 25(1), 32(1)(b), 32(1)(d) and 32(2) GDPR by not taking

(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 the

municipality €409,768 (NOK 4,000,000) for breaches of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, Article 24 GDPR and Article 32 GDPR after a serious ransomware attack led to highly

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

by the alleged violation of Article 32 of the RGPD, Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, Article 25 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD. FOURTH: On

NIF B87914446, for the alleged violation of article 28 of the RGPD typified in accordance with Article 83.4.a) of the RGPD. SECOND: APPOINT B.B.B. as instructor

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

APERCIBIMENTO to B.B.B., with NIF *** NIF.1, 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

prove the lawfulness of processing according to Article 6(1)(b) GDPR and for violating Article 12(2) GDPR by creating undue barriers to the exercise of the

of Articles 5(1)(a), 6 and 28(3) GDPR and adopted an administrative fine on the basis of Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 GDPR. The total amount of the fine took

violation of article 12 of the GDPR Without prejudice to the provisions of article 83 of the GDPR, the aforementioned Regulation provides in section 2.b) of article

unlawfully. 2.4 Administrative fine Pursuant to Article 58, paragraph 2, preamble, in conjunction with Article 83, paragraph 4, of the GDPR and article 14, third

" 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

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

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

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

orrequest-related processing activities. ». 2.5. Article 32 - Processing security:2.5.1. In accordance with the provisions of Article 32 of the Rules of Procedure, which

this regard [GDPR Article 14 (2) b) ]. (iv) The prospectus did not provide any information regarding data subject rights [GDPR Article 14 (2) c)]. In the

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:

Madridsedeagpd.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

Customer 2. as a data processor 1) finds that Customer 2. has not complied with Article 32 (1) of the General Data Protection Regulation; paragraph (b) when

Judiciales (JAVA). JAVA infringed Article 6(1)(a) GDPR by publishing illegal recordings on its website and also infringed Article 22(2) LSSI due to its cookie policy

intervention Article 58 (2) (i) and Article 83 (2) state that the IMY has the power to impose administrative penalty fees in accordance with Article 83. the circumstances

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

comply with GDPR Article 12 (1) and GDPR Article 5 (2) of the provisions of paragraph 2, and he did not even mention the Data Subject 2. Based on GDPR Article

amount of the fine under Article 83(2) GDPR. The data subjects complains about the violation of its right of access (Article 15 GDPR) by the Istituto Nazionale

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

(hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged violation of article 15 of the RGPD, in accordance with article 83.5 b) of the RGPD. Against the initial agreement, no

obtained from them, as required under Article 14(1)(a) AVG and Article 14(2)(c)(e) and point (f) AVG; c. article 12 j° article 14 AVG, in view of the defendant

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

and the Council in the context of Article 31, Article 58(1)(e) in conjunction with Article 83(1) to (3) and Article 83(5)(e) of Regulation 2016/679 of the

subjects infringes Article 6 (1) (a) GDPR. The AEPD fined the data processor in an amount of 4,000 Euro for the violation of Article 6 (1) (a) GDPR. Since the

the criminal sanction referred to in Article 170 of the Code and the administrative fine provided for in Article 83(5)(e) of the Regulation shall apply;

COM) with NIF B87043691 is exempt from liability which could constitute a breach of Article 13 of the GPRS, a breach of Article 83.5 (b) of the GPRS SECOND:

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

in points 7.1 and 8.3 of the decision. 2. Decision on order and infringement fine 1. Pursuant to Article 58 (2) (2) of the Privacy Regulation, EAS / Elektro

and in a transparency (b. "a"), purpose limitation (b. “b”), data minimisation (b. “c”), accuracy (b. “d”), storage limitation (b. “e”), integrity and confidentiality

contemplated in article 83.2 of the RGPD, with Regarding the offense committed by violating the provisions of article 13, it allows set a penalty of 2,000 euros

forseen in Articles 15 to 22 GDPR. Failure to provide this information constitutes a "serious infraction" per Article 83.5 GDPR. However, the DPA held that

for the alleged violation of Article 5.1.f) of the RGPD, in relation to article 5 of the LOPDGDD, as indicated in article 83.5 a) of the RGPD. The telematic

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

the alleged violation of article 28 of the RGPD in relation to the Article 24 of the RGPD punishable in accordance with article 83.4 of the RGPD, for the

Policy on their website (Article 13 GDPR) and for the absence of a reject button on the second layer of their Cookie Policy (Article 22(2) LSSI). The claimant

administrative sanction provided in conjunction with art. 2-quater, 166, paragraph 2, of the Code, and 83, par. 3 and 5, of the Regulations; NOTING that for the

Pursuant to Article 2 (2), the General Data Protection Regulation shall apply with the additions indicated therein. Pursuant to Article 2 (2) of the General

information. IV Without prejudice to the provisions of article 83.5, sections a) and b), of the RGPD, its art. 58.2 b) provides the possibility of sanctioning with

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

cf. Article 58, paragraph 2, letter i, cf. Article 83. Both infringements of Article 6 and Article 13 may be sanctioned with a fee, cf. Article 85, paragraph

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

regarding Article 6(1) GDPR and consent requirements regulated previously to GDPR. The fact that the infringements related to Article 25 GDPR did not include