Search results

effect on someone'. No exception to prohibition For the use of fingerprints, 2 exceptions to the prohibition could be possible in this case: if explicit consent

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

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

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

in Article 6 GDPR. If the information also includes sensitive data specified in Article 9(1) GDPR, there must be a basis for processing in Article 9(2)

personal health records? According to the IP, for the purposes of Article 9(2)(b) GDPR, employers are only entitled to process (ie obtain and store) general

readers in its venues. Article 9(2)(b) does not cover processing purely to meet contractual employment rights or obligations. Article 9(2)(b) was not a legitimate

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

regulation article 6 no. 1 letter c (legal obligation), article 6 no. 1 letter e (exercising public authority), as well as article 9 no. 2 letter b (fulfilling

that a valid legal basis would be either Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, or Article 6(1)(d) GDPR or Article 9(2)(b) GDPR. The Data protection authority (the UOOU)

rely on Article 9(2)(b) GDPR. The LArbG Berlin-Brandenburg also confirmed that the processing was not necessary in light of Article 9(2)(b) GDPR, and emphasised

first paragraph. Article 11 of the Act, cf. Paragraphs 1 and 2 Article 9 of the Regulation. According to point b of point 3. Article 3 of the Act, health

based on Articles 6(c) and 9(2)(b). The school did not specify the source of the legal obligation under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR, nor the source of the obligations

with Article 9, second paragraph, under b, of the GDPR. The Division will therefore not go into this part of its argument. 4.2. Pursuant to Article 21,

fairness (Article 5(1)(a) GDPR). Thus by not providing sufficient information, the controller breached Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 13 GDPR. Additionally

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

has specifically been Article 6 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 9 (1) (f) and Article 9 (1) 2, letter f, as TV 2 has "transferred" personal

/ Weichert / Sommer, EU-GDPR and BDSG, 2nd edition 2020, Art. 9 GDPR marginal 3).9 GDPR does not allow recourse to Art. 6 GDPR (Albers / Veit in Wolff

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

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

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

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

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

data are processed, in Article 9(2) GDPR. Where personal data relating to criminal matters are being processed under Article 10 GDPR (e.g. copy of the criminal

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

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

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

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

the controller under Article 33(2) GDPR." See, EDPB, Guidelines 9/2022 on personal data breach notification under GDPR (Version 2.0), 28 March 2023, p

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

in paragraph 2 shall not be based on special categories of personal data referred to in Article 9(1), unless point (a) or (g) of Article 9(2) applies and

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

data covered by Article 9 GDPR or Article 10 GDPR, and is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, and (b) when the processing

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

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 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

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

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

(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)

standards in Article 43(9) for certification mechanisms is precisely to ensure uniformity of implementation. Furthermore, Article 43(9) GDPR also allows

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

receiving disability pension, in breach of Article 5(1)(c), Article 5(1)(e), Article 6(1), and Article 9(2) GDPR. The Norwegian Public Service Pension Fund

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

(which are listed in Article 58 GDPR) to certain safeguards, which are listed in Section 115(5)-(9) of the Act. For instance, Section 115(9) requires that the

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

trigger Article 9, irrespective of how the data is further processed by the data controllers the data was disclosed to. The exception under Article 9(2) is

formation, meaning one president and five others elected members, pursuant to Article 9 of the Law "Informatique et Libertés". The CNIL's internal rules indicate

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

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

Subparagraph (1)(b) therefore has to be written as #1b! Example: [[Article 6 GDPR#1b|Article 6(1)(b)]] becomes Article 6(1)(b) and links to Article 6, section

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

categories set out in Article 9(1) GDPR relate, the user does not 'manifestly make public', within the meaning of Article 9(2)(e) GDPR, the data relating

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

................... .....9 2.2.2 The Privacy Protection Authority's assessment...................................10 2.3 Tele2 is the personal data controller

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,

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

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

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

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

cites Articles 5(1)(b) and (e), 9(2)(j), 89(1) GDPR and Section 7(1)(1) and (2)(1) GDPR. In particular, it follows from Article 9(2)(j) GDPR that the processing

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

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

6(1)(a) GDPR for consent and Article 6(1) GDPR if there was no legal basis at all). If any other EU law was relied on, add the Article and name of the law and

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 regarding

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

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

the context of the employment relationship. In application of Article 88 of the GDPR, Article 111 of the Code provides that such data shall be processed in

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

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

regarding Articles 5(1)(b) GDPR and 5(1)(e) GDPR and held that national courts had to determine, using the factors of Article 6(4) GDPR, whether further processing

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

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

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

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

referred to in Art. 17 GDPR and (b) that the person has no right of objection within the meaning of Art. 21 GDPR. 3.2.2 art. 21 para. 1 GDPR provides that a data

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

§ 8 clause 2 of the GTC agreed between the parties (according to § 8 b paragraph 2 MB/KK). 52 § 8 b para. 2 MB/KK violates §203 sentence 2 VVG and is therefore

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

300 euros (THREE HUNDRED euros). SECOND: ORDER D. B.B.B. that, pursuant to article 58.2 d) of the GDPR, in the Within ten business days, take the following

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

section 2, letter b), of this article. The The implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in re article 93,

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

breach of Article 32 of the GDPR has occurred. B. On the failure to notify the data breach to the CNIL 32. Pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the GDPR, in the

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

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

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

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

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

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 processing

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

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 the ICA, to impose

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

right to access under Article 15 GDPR because the controller was entitled to reject the request pursuant to Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The court reasoned that

(VWA ./05, see point II.2), the XXXX (VWA ./06, see point II.2) and a certificate of representation (VWA ./07, see point II.2). I.2. As a result, the BA continued

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

RESOLVES: FIRST: IMPOSE B.B.B., with NIF ***NIF.1, for a violation of Article 6 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5.a) of the GDPR, and classified as very

d'un accord conformément à l'article 9, paragraphe 2, point b) ; et b) le traitement est effectué par des moyens automatisés. 2. Dans l'exercice de son droit

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

and with Article 21(5) of the GDPR, and with Article 21(2)(a) of the GDPR. 1(b) of Law No. 2472/1997, in conjunction with Article 13 par. 4 of Law No. 3471/2006

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

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

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

decision within the meaning of Article 22(1) and Article 22(2) GDPR - then the opening clause of Article 22(2)(b) GDPR does not apply to national rules

conjunction with § 307 para. 1 sentence 2 BGB. The plaintiff bases claim 1.c. on § 2 para. 1, para. 2 p. 1 no. 11 b) UKlaG in conjunction with. § 25 para

the following: Article 66 GDPR gives the possibility for a procedure of urgency and from this article (and Article 66 and Article 62 GDPR), the European

pre-existing form of Article 11 of Law 3471/2006). However, with the provisions of article 16 par. 1 and 2 of law 3917/2011, par. 1 and 2 of article 11 of law 3471/2006

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

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

portability of the data c) when the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9, paragraph 2, letter a), the existence of the right to withdraw consent

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

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

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

that under Article 82 (1) and (2) GDPR, any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of a violation of the GDPR is entitled

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

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)

or by a third party. The court used Article 9(2)(f) GDPR to interpret legitimate interests under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR as including the establishment, exercise

otherwise processed. (b) the data subject withdraws the consent on which the processing was based pursuant to Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a) and there is

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

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

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

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

specific categories of information in Article 8 (1) and (5) of Directive 95/46 or in Article 9 (1), Article 10 (1) and Article 10 of Regulation 2016/679, the

controller unlawfully processed special categories of data in violation of Article 9(2) GDPR, including health data. The DPA also ruled out that the contract between

situation (see Article 9 DSRL 95/46/EC, Article 85 DSGVO - so-called media privilege; see above, marginal no. 11 f.). The reference in Article 9 of the DSRL

conjunction with article 21 par. 1 verse b of Law 2472/1997 and the article of 84 Law 4624/2019, the administrative penalty mentioned in the operative part

the public interest, per Article 6(1)(e) GDPR, and was also necessary for scientific research purposes under Article 9(2)(j) GDPR. Thirdly, that the data

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

conjunction with article 21 par. 1 verse b of Law 2472/1997 and the article of 84 Law 4624/2019, the administrative sanction, referred to in the operative

processed; b) the interested party withdraws the consent on which the treatment is based in accordance with Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a) and this

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

considered appropriate in accordance with Article 31(1)(b) GDPR and Article 32(2) GDPR. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to identify

lawfulness (section 2.2 below) and purpose (section 2.3 below). Finally, it will address the issue of the sanction (section 2.4 below) 2.1 Applicable Law

(d) and (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

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

the exception in Article 7.3.9(2) of the Youth Act is not applicable until the 20 years have elapsed. The exception in Article 7.3.9(2) of the Youth Act

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

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

cases G.B.6 (11 days delay in applying the Registry), G.B.8 (6 days), G.B.9 (3 days including a weekend), G.B.10 (4 days including a weekend) and G.B.11 (5

categories of personal data pursuant to Article 9(1) of the GDPR, unless any of the exceptions set out under Article 9(2) is applicable to the processing. These

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

section 6 (2) of the Data Protection Act.n as a safeguard in accordance with subsection 2.n as a safeguard in accordance with subsection 2. 15. According

instance, the controller sought to rely upon Article 6(1)(e) GDPR and Article 9(2)(j) GDPR. Article 6(1)(e) GDPR establishes a lawful basis for the processing

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

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

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

could not be considered appropriate in accordance with Article 32(1) GDPR and Article 32(2) GDPR regarding the online appointment booking system. As a result

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

" 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

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

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

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)

that the Medical List does today, cf. GDPR Article 4, No. 11, Article 6 No. 1 letter a, Article 7 and Article 9 No. 2 letter a If current practice is invalid

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

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

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

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

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

the Personal Data Act and the Privacy Ordinance, cf. section 2 and Article 2 of the Ordinance 2. The Personal Data Act and the Privacy Ordinance are coming

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, 2018, 9:00.

presenting the principles of data processing of Article 5(1) GDPR, underlined that, based on Article 5(2) GDPR, it is the data processor's responsibility to

issued on 9/4/2014 by the Working Group of Article 29 on data protection, (b) the Opinion of the Article 29 Working Party on GATT entitled "Opinion 2/2017 on

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

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

an infringement of Article 5 (1) a), b) and c) and (2) of the GDPR and Article 24 (1) of the GDPR; and - an infringement of article 8 of the law of 21

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

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

therefore lawful [also in the light of] Article 6(f) of the Regulation" (p. 21) - as regards the infringement of Article 9(2)(b) of the Regulation "it is clear

Articles 5.1.a, 5.1.b, 6.1.c), 6.3, 9.2.i), 12.1, 13.1.c), 13.2.a), 13.2.d), 13.2.e), 30.1.a) and 30.1.d), 35.1 and 35.7 of the GDPR 9. The applicant further

for the infringement of article 58.1 of the RGPD, typified in art. 83. 5 e) of the aforementioned RGPD. SECOND: To appoint B.B.B. as instructor and C.C

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

there is no explicit consent by the customers as requested under Article 9(2)(a) GDPR and an implied consent cannot fulfill the provision’s requirement

for the alleged 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

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

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

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

A., and B.B.B., with the aim of capturing and recording the acts of a sexual nature, carried out on the "complainant", described in section "B" of the

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

3 Sentence 2 GDPR is in accordance and whether there is a conflict of interest within the meaning of. Article 38 Paragraph 6 Sentence 2 GDPR applies if

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

to the storage of data; (c) where the processing is based on Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a), the existence of the right to withdraw consent at any time

data Article 9.2.a: Express consent Article 9.2.b: Fulfillment of labor law obligations, etc. Article 9.2.c: Protection of vital interests Article 9.2.d:

/ Company that hires" section: o NIF: *** NIF.2 o Name: B.B.B. o Surname: B.B.B.  In the "Change of Holder" section: o Name and surname former owner: the

employer we must look for it in article 9 and 6 of the RGPD. Article 9 of the RGPD establishes in its sections 1 and 2.b) the following: "one. The processing

the combined provisions of article 32, paragraph 1, subparagraphs b) and d) and article 83, paragraph 4, al.a), of the GDPR, with a fine of € 0.00 to €

***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

data Article 9.2.a: Explicit consent Article 9.2.b: Execution of labor law obligations etc. Article 9.2.c: Protection of vital interests Article 9.2.d: Edit

means, as defined by the concept of 'processing of personal data' in Article 2 (b) of Directive 95 / 46 is the collection and transmission of personal

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

aforementioned Law LGT.2, NAME B.B.B. as instructor and C.C.C. as secretary, indicating that any of them may be challenged, if appropriate, in accordance with

right to privacy, namely, personal data that are protected by Article 9(1) and 9(2)(f) of the GDPR (i.e. union dues, insurance and alimony payments and absences

files, of estate [estate 2] , [estate 1] , [address 1] , [name of house] ( [address 2] at [place B] ) and the pasture at [place B] and the accompanying guidance

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

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

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)

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

for the alleged violation 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

representation in all proceedings, and that “El 9 June 2020, Wallner receives a call from lawyer B.B.B., from the IMF firm ABOGADOS Y ECONOMISTAS S.L.

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

personal data (Article 9 GDPR)? Does the data controller have a legitimate interest to process credit card data of recurring purchasers under Article 6(1)(f)

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

Law", which is a requirement of Article 9(2)(j) GDPR. Therefore, the controller could not rely on Article 9(2)(j) GDPR for its processing. Third, the DPA

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

the BVwG held that the DSB failed to take into account Article 6(1)(e) and Article 9(2)(f) GDPR in their legal assessment but merely held that § 1 DSG

personal data, even without references to names. Moreover, (2) it included health data (Article 4(15) GDPR) as the newsletters were send to patients of the respected

data breach (Article 32 GDPR). Does the plaintiff have a right to compensation according to Article 82(1) GDPR and does Article 82(3) GDPR stipulate a reversal

processed; b) the data subject withdraws the consent on the basis of which the processing was carried out in accordance with Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a)

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

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

concluded that the controller had breached Article 39(1)(b) GDPR. Regarding the breach of Article 38(2) GDPR, the CNPD found that controller had failed

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

application of Article 17.3.b, the complainant cannot invokea reason provided for in article 17.1 or 17.2 for requesting the erasure of data concerning him.b) The

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

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

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

registered on the Robinson List in breach of Article 48(1)(b) LGT and Article 21 GDPR in conjunction with Article 23(4) LOPDGDD. Avilon Center SL made an voluntary

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

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

condition of necessity is maintained under Article 6.1 b) to f) of the GDPR. The article 6.1 of the GDPR replaces Article 7 of the Directive, without the relevant

sedeagpd.gob.es Page 9 9/14 or indirectly, through the infraction. ” Regarding section k) of article 83.2 of the RGPD, the LOPDGDD, article 76, " Sanctions

the duty of confidentiality - contained in paragraph e) of paragraph 2 of Article 64, that states that the National Tax Number and home address associated

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:

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)

(2) (f) and Article 14 (2) (g), Article 14 (1) andArticle 15 (1) (h) and Article 21 (1)infringement of Article 18 (1) (a) and (d).order the restriction

that Section 9 (1) GDPR contains a restriction to a certain professional group (“classic media companies”), although Article 85 (2) GDPR does not include

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

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

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

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

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

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

Therefore the controller violated Article 5(1)(a) and (2), Article 6(1), Article 12(1), Article 13(1)(b) and (c) GDPR. The DPA imposed a fine of €50.000

DPIA cf. Article 35 - clearly inform students cf. Article 12 that a) it's voluntary to participate in the survey cf. Article 13(2)(f), and b) that their

accordance with Article 60 of the AVG. No objections to this were submitted. 2. Legal Framework 2.1 Scope of the AVG Pursuant to Article 2(1) of the AVG

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

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

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

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

restrictions of this right arise from Para. 2 leg. cit., but not from Art. 6 Para. 1 or 9 (2) GDPR. However, the GDPR and in particular the principles enshrined

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

consent of the 10 complainant (article 6.1 a) of the GDPR combined with article 7 of the GDPR), (2) article 6.1 c) of the GDPR in that the publication results

health, culture, and emotional state. This combined with the fact that Article 4(2) GDPR includes "transmission" and "dissemination" in the definition of processing

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

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

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

sedeagpd.gob.es 17/28 ANNEX 0 A.A.A. (hereinafter claimant 1). B.B.B. (hereinafter claimant 2). C.C.C. (hereinafter claimant 3). D.D.D. (hereinafter claimant

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) Therefore, based on the foregoing

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)

of Article 6(1)(e) GDPR -public interest and exercise of official authority vested in it, which falls within the exception of Article 9(2)(j) GDPR. It

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:

policies regulating this, they failed to comply to Article 24(1) and (2) GDPR and Article 25(1) and (2) GDPR. No fine was imposed, but a reprimand and clear

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

neither to the claimant, nor to Mr. B.B.B. Likewise, a search of all the SMS sent by the system in the file of Mr. B.B.B. and the only phone number that appears

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

otherwise treated;b) the interested party withdraws the consent on which the treatment ofin accordance with Article 6 (1) (a) or Article 9 (2) (a), andit is

ONLINE S.L. with NIF B87298923, in accordance with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified

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

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.

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

TODOTECNICOS24H S.L. with NIF B86558533, in accordance with the provisions of article 58.2.b) of the RGPD, for the alleged infringement of article 13 of the RGPD, typified

processed; (b) the data subject withdraws consent on which the processing is based according to point (a) of Article 6(1), or point (a) of Article 9(2), and

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

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

referred to in section 2 shall not be based on the categories personal data referred to in article 9, paragraph 1, unless Article 9(2)(a) or (g) applies and

context of Articles 40 and 41 GDPR, in particular from Article 40 Paragraph 4 in conjunction with Article 41 Paragraph 2 lit. c) GDPR, namely further that a monitoring

change of holder of my wife's line B.B.B. DNI ***NIF.2 tlf. ***Phone.1 to my name, A.A.A. DNI ***NIF.1 tlf. ***PHONE 2 the shop assistant made us sign a

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

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

in the storage systems, which is contrary to Article 32 paragraph 1 point b) and paragraph 2 of the GDPR; 2. The controller processed the personal data

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

stored or otherwise processed. 2.9 Article 32 GDPR applies to both controllers and processors. Penalties 2.10 Article 83(1) GDPR requires supervisory authorities

Articles 13, 14, 18 and 21 DSGVO were excluded under Article 9(8) CESTA. Pursuant to Article 9.2(i) of the DSGVO, the defendant was entitled to lawfully

another real estate agent for the sale. 2 Process flow First instance 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 PME summoned [plaintiff] on May 9, 2018 (see also paragraph 1.12 above)

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

conjunction with Section 99(2) of the AVG, the Wbp was repealed on 25 May and the AVG entered into force on that date. 2.2 Section 48, tenth paragraph

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

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

data within the meaning of Article 9 of the AVG must indeed be based on Article 9.2 of the AVG, read in conjunction with Article 6.1 of the AVG. This was

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

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

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

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

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

personal data 9 2.1.1 Factual findings 9 2.1.2Legal assessment 9 2.2 Controller and processor(s) 10 2.2.1 Factual findings 10 2.2.2Legal assessment 12 2.3Security

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

” 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

infringement of Article 5.1 b) in conjunction with Article 6.4. AVG, on article 5.1 a) in conjunction with article 6.1. AVG and on article 5.1 c) GDPR has been

” 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

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

listed in Article 2(3) of that directive and Article 2(2) of that regulation, apply. 62 In particular, it should be noted that Article 9 of the GDPR and Article

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

engines (see Annex 1 to note of 9 January 2019, p. 1); b) to be "aware of the dispersion of data on 12.12.2018" (see note of 9 January 2019, p. 1) and to have

subject has exercised their right to object under Article 21 GDPR. In the same way, Article 48(1)(b) of the Spanish General Telecommunications Act grants

3 and 9, art. 33 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

collected or otherwise processed; (b) the data subject withdraws his or her consent under Article 6 (1) (a) or Article 9 (2) (a) and there is no other legal

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

of the data; d) when the treatment is based on article 6, paragraph 1, letter a), or article 9, section 2, letter a), the existence of the right to withdraw

that, in cases of video surveillance, Article 22.4 LOPDGDD provides that the duty of disclosure in Article 12 GDPR may be fulfilled by placing a sign near

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

accordance with Article 33 GDPR to the Belgian DPA. Nonetheless, there were suspicions that the controller did not comply with Article 32 GDPR. Especially

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

thedata; c) when the treatment is based on article 6, paragraph 1, letter a), or theArticle 9, paragraph 2, letter a), the existence of the right to withdraw

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

of data; (d) where processing is based on point (a) of Article 6(1) or point (a) of Article 9(2), that the data subject shall have the right to withdraw

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

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

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

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

the notice board of the neighbour’s community a violation of Article 5 (1) (f) GDPR? Article 9 of Ley de Propriedad Horizontal provides that: "If a summons

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

"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

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

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

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

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

images to Instagram are: A.A.A., born 07/25/2005. B.B.B., born on 05/02/2006 C.C.C., born 11/19/2005 2. That, according to the Judicial Police, the video

have ordered me. 2º- On January 2, 2021, I proceed to sue the company […], whose legal representatives or administrators are A.A.A. and B.B.B .. The reason

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

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

Complainant 2.- E / 11744/2019 A.A.A. - *** NIE.1 Claimant 3.- E / 11798/2019 B.B.B. - *** NIF.1 Claimant 4.- E / 05495/2020 C.C.C. - *** NIF.2 Claimant 5

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:

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

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

PCR (SARS_CoV-2) test is to be qualified as a health data pursuant to Article(4)(15) GDPR and that the scope of protection of Article 9(2) must be taken

***EMAIL.1,and (ii) the coordinator of ***LOCA-LIDAD.1 D.ª B.B.B., from the address ***EMAIL.2 (i) - Dated 04/06/2018, in which he addresses the complainant

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

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

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

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

" 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

accountability pursuant to Article 5(2) UK GDPR because it failed to demonstrate compliance with Article 5(1)(a) and (c) UK GDPR principles of lawfulness

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

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

ESLORA PROJECTOS,SL, with CIF: B95608196 owner of the web pages: *** URL.1 , *** URL.2 and *** URL.3 ,for violation of article 22.2) of the LSSI, punishable

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

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

portability concerned the right to (c) information based on Article 6 (1) (a) or Article 9 (2) (a); in the case of data processing, the right to withdraw

fairness and transparency (Article 5.1 a) GDPR), purpose limitation (Article 5.1 b) GDPR) and minimum data processing (Article 5.1 c) GDPR); 4) the legal basis

Infotv. Pursuant to Section 60 (2): “For the initiation of data protection authority proceedings Article 77 (1) and Article 22 (b) of the General Data Protection

including the conditions for consent under articles 5, 6, 7 and 9; [...]. However, Article 58(2)(b) of the same legal text provides for the possibility of to

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

legitimate and explicit purpose. Therefore, it was contrary to Article 5(1)(b) GDPR and Article 6 GDPR. In addition, the DPA found that the controller did not

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

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

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

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

Officer (DPO) under Section 4 of Chapter 4 of the GDPR (see in particular Article 37 GDPR to Article 39 GDPR). One of these audit proceedings concerned a Luxembourg

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.)

of warning to B.B.B., with NIF *** NIF.1, for an infringement of article 5.1.a) of the RGPD, as determined by articles 83.5 a) and 58.2.b) of the RGPD.

accordance with Article 58, paragraph 2, subparagraph b of the General Data Protection Regulation, and an order pursuant to Article 58, paragraph 2, subparagraph

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

" 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

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

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

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

right to information according to Art 15 GDPR, especially since it can be derived from recitals 9 and 10 of the GDPR that the European legislator is reducing

relief only with regard to the motions under 2 a) and 2 b) and partially with regard to the motion under 2 d), so that the rest of the regional court decision

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

[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

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

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

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.

particularly difficult. 9. In view of the above findings, the Authority considers, by unanimity, that the controller referred to in Article 21 (1) (b) of Law 2472/1997

EDREAMS, S.L. was ordered for a violation of the Article 44 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, adapt the activity of data processing carried

The Spanish DPA (AEPD) fined Borjamotor, S.A. for infringing Article 7 GDPR and Article Article 21(1) of the Spanish Law on Information Society Services (LSSI)

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

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)

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

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

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

section of Investigated Entities. It also provides other data:Name: B.B.B.Surname: B.B.B.Address: ***ADDRESS.1Contact e-mail: ***EMAIL.1Contact telephone:

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

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

under Article 15 GDPR and demanded free access to the historic bank transaction data. The bank argued that this would be a misuse of Article 15 GDPR and

IMPOSE RAISE MARKETING, SL, with NIF B67543355, for a violation of Article 48.1.b) of the LGT, typified in Article 78.11 of the LGT (minor offense), a fine

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)

portability; (d) where processing is based on point (a) of Article 6(1) or point (a) of Article 9(2), the existence of the right to withdraw consent at any

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

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

violation of article 21 of the LSSICE, classified as serious in article 38.3.d) and c) of said rule, for the alleged infringement of article 48.1.b) of the

para 11 CFR Art11 para 1 ECHR Art10 para 1 GDPR Art4 no 2 GDPR Art4 no 7 GDPR Art85 para 1 GDPR Art85 para 2 Text GZ: DSB-D123.768/0004-DSB/2019 of 18.12

violation of article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in accordance with article 58 par. 2 i' of the GDPR in combination with article 83 par. 5 of the GDPR. The

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

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

defendant and the processing of personal data (article 83.2.k, of the RGPD in relation to article 76.2.b, of the LOPDGDD) The activity of the defendant

2000 and the Personal Data Regulations 2000 applied. Regulations §§ 2-6, 2-11, 2-13 and 2-14 regulated such matters as the case concerns. The relevant conditions

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

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

conferred by article 79(2) of the GDPR. This is the relevant provision for the purposes of para 3.1(20) of CPR Practice Direction 3B. Article 79(2) provides:

treated; (b) the data subject withdraws the consent on the basis of which the processing of in accordance with Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a) a), and

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

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

described violates article 6.1. of the RGPD and is subsumable in the sanctioning type of the article 83.5.a, of the RGPD. IV Article 72.1.b) of the LOPDGDD

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

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

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

No. 1, No. 2, Art. 6 para. 1 sentence 1 lit. c, para. 3 sentence 1, Art. 86 GKG § 47 (1), § 52 (2), § 53 (2) no. 2, § 63 (3) sentence 1 no. 2, § 66 (3)

assistance under Article 2.3 of the Youth Act and that deletion would violate the Archives Act (Archiefwet) and Article 17(3)(b) GDPR. The mother objected

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

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

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

4(7) GDPR, and Company A was the processor for the purposes of Article 4(8) GDPR. The DPA found that both Companies A and B had breached Article 31 GDPR and

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

to"Process third party data" (art. 83.2 a) RGPD).- the intentionality or negligence in the infringement (art. 83.2 b) RGPD).For all these reasons, it is

otherwise treated; b) the interested party withdraws the consent on which the treatment is based in accordance with Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a) and this

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

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)

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

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

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

according to article 5 par. 1 a) and f) GDPR. B. It imposes, on ALFA BANK S.A., as controller, based on article 58 par. 2 sec. i) of the GDPR, an administrative

processed; b) the data subject withdraws the consent on the basis of which the processing was carried out in accordance with Article 6(1)(a) or Article 9(2)(a)

standard B-VG Art 130 Paragraph 2a B-VG Art 133 Paragraph 4 B-VG Art87 Paragraph 2 BVwGG §24a BVwGG §3 GDPR Art55 Paragraph 3 GOG §84 GOG §85 B-VG Art.

(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 of the right to withdraw

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)

emphasised: None of the personal data concerned information covered by Article 9 or 10 GDPR. The data subject was interviewed as part of his role in the business

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

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)

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

the conduct object of this claim is undeniable (article 76.2.b) of the LOPDGDD in relation to article 83.2.k). - Although it cannot be argued that the defendant

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

Juan, 6www.aepd.es28001 - Madridsedeagpd.gob.es Page 9 9/9In accordance with the provisions of article 50 of the LOPDGDD, thisResolution will be made public

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

2019, GDPR Art. 37, para. 1; Döpfler , EU-GDPR and BDSG, 2nd edition 2020, GDPR Art. 37, marginal 1; Paal / Pauly, DS-GVO BDSG, 2nd ed. 2018, GDPR Art.

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

representation does not replace Article 9 (2) (a) and (c) consent of the data subject in accordance with Article 7. Article 7 (1) of the ECHR provides that

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

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

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

breached Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. Therefore, the DPA handed down a 'call to order' against the joint controllers for breaching Article 5(1)(b) GDPR, and no

Sections 1004 analogously, Section 823 (1) and (2) BGB in conjunction with Article 6 (1) GDPR and Article 17 GDPR. Claims under data protection law could be

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

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

is maintained under Article 6.1 b) to f) of the GDPR and therefore in Article 6.1.c) invoked in the species. Article 6.1 of the GDPR in fact reproduces

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

violation of the general right of personality under Article 1.1, Article 2.1 of the Basic Law (Article 7, Article 8 of the Basic Law) was to be taken into account

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)

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

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

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