Search results

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

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

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

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

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

Journal of the European Union. 2. It shall apply from 25 May 2018. There is no relevant recital for Article 99 GDPR. Article 99 GDPR sets out the dates of the

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

of the use of GDPR and other aspects which the GDPR leaves for definition to the member states (for ex. Art. 6(3), some aspects of Art. 9(2), Art. 10, Art

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

in Category:Article 45 GDPR Kuner, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 45 GDPR, p. 774 (Oxford

referred to in Article 64. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2). Recital 167:

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

from Article 6(1) GDPR and comply with the principles enshrined in Article 5 GDPR. Additionally, the processing will still be subject to other GDPR provisions

(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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

important to note that Article 13(1)(f) GDPR, Article 14(1)(f) GDPR, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR and Article 15(2) GDPR, make specific reference to transfers of personal

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

practices published under Article 70(3) GDPR. Though Article 70(3) GDPR already obliges the EDPB to make these public, Article 71(2) GDPR ensures that the public

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

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

exchange of knowledge between them. This way, Article 50 GDPR expands the exhortation under Article 57(1)(g) GDPR that calls for cooperation between EU DPAs

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

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

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

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

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

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

related decisions in Category:Article 16 GDPR Meents, Hinzpeter in Taeger, Gabel, DSGVO – BDSG, Article 16 GDPR, margin number 2 (Deutscher Fachverlag, 4th

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

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

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

accordance with Article 58(1) GDPR. Article 90 GDPR was drafted with a view to regulate potential conflicts between the application of the GDPR on the one hand

processing (Article 32(1) GDPR) and the general principles of processing set out in Article 5 GDPR. In confirming the above interpretation, Paragraph 2 sets out

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

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

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

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

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

accountability obligation enshrined in Article 5(2) GDPR. This theory is not totally convincing. In light of Article 5(2) GDPR, a reversal of burden of proof for

ng, Article 62 GDPR, margin number 11 (Beck 2018, 2nd edition). Riccio, Scorza, Belisario, GDPR e normativa privacy – Commentario, Article 62 GDPR (Wolters

compliance with the GDPR under Article 58(2)(d) GDPR or even ban it under Article 58(2)(f) GDPR. Therefore, complaints under Article 77 GDPR should extend to

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

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

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

consistency mechanism under Article 65(2)(1) GDPR and the adoption of the EDPS’s rules of procedure under Article 72(2) GDPR. Notably, each EDPB member

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

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

resolution mechanism under Article 65 GDPR in connection with Article 63 GDPR is triggered (Article 60 (4) GDPR). Article 60(2) GDPR clarifies that also in

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beck, 2018, 2nd edition). We refer, in that respect, to the Commentary on Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. Spiecker et al., GDPR Article-by-Article Commentary (2023)

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

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

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

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

information as outlined in Articles 13 and 14 of the GDPR (see above). Article 26(2) of the GDPR emphasizes the significance of these specific obligations

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

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

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

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

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

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

with Article 13, Article 14 GDPR gives expression to the principle of transparency enshrined in Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and further defined in Article 12 GDPR

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

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

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

in principle (see hereunder Article 65(2) GDPR) to adopt a decision under Article 65 GDPR is reached, since Article 64 GDPR only requires a simple majority

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

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

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

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

decision". Similar to the ex-ante information in Article 13(2)(f) and 14(2)(f) GDPR, Article 15(2) GDPR requires that in case the controller transfers data

provided for in Article 52(3) GDPR and Articles 53(3) and 53(4) GDPR. For more information on SA members and staff, please refer to Article 52(2) GDPR (SA members)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regarding points 1 and 2 a) Basic information about Article 15 GDPRa) Basic information about Article 15 GDPR Pursuant to Article 15 Para. 1 GDPR, the data subject

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

understood as made to the GDPR, in accordance with article 94 of the last. Likewise, it is apparent from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

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

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

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

data is a fundamental right. Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and Article 16(1) of the Treaty on the

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

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

history of GDPR explicitly shows that GDPR does foresee parallel enforcement. No violation of Article 94(1) of the Austrian Constitution ("B-VG"). § 29(2) DSG

requirements of the GDPR; Because from Recital 171 Sentence 2 GDPR, from Art. 4 No. 2 GDPR and Art. 24 Para. 1, in particular Sentence 2 GDPR, the obligation

of the judgment article 6, d) and article 6, e) of the GBA law, but this should be read as article 6.1. d) and Article 6.1. e) of the GDPR. Decision on 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)

lawfulness under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR ("does the employer have legitimate interests in monitoring quarantine compliance?") or Article 9(2) GDPR ("quarantine

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

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

According to Article 94 of the GDPR "references to the repealed directive must be understood as references to the [GDPR]". 84. Under Article 4, paragraph

processed on the basis of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR does not have the rights to erasure and objection contained in Article 17 and Article 21 GDPR respectively. This

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

the conditions laid down in Article 7 GDPR. Additionally, in this case, the IP also reiterated the provisions of Article 8 GDPR on conditions applicable to

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

personal data under Article 9 GDPR. The processing of such data is prohibited unless one of the exceptions referred to in Article 9(2) GDPR applies. In the

person, using Article 15 as their basis. The Slovenian DPA (IP) was asked for an opinion concerning the scope of GDPR Article 15. Within the GDPR, an individual

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

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

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

lawfulness, the Litigation Chamber concludes that Article 5.1.a. of the GDPR in conjunction with Article 6 of the GDPR have not been complied with with regard to

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

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

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

§ 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

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

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

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

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

95/46/EC) on the same date (see Article 94 GDPR). That the initiating petition in this case dates from 22 May 2018 and that Article 48, paragraph 10 of the (Dutch)

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

dossier werden toegevoegd. 2. Motivering 2.1. De bevoegdheid van de Inspectiedienst en de Geschillenkamer en de omvang van het dossier 2.1.1. Het verzoek van

principle of Fairness (Article 5(1)(a) GDPR), purpose limitation (Article 5(1)(b) GDPR) and data minimisation (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR) would not prevent the

meldt de verweerder aan de Geschillenkamer een kopie van stuk 2 van het dossier (art. 95, §2, 3° WOG) te wensen ontvangen, hetwelk hem werd overgemaakt op

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

supervisory authority. The court stated that Article 82 of the Law Informatique et Libertés was a transposition of article 5(3) of the Directive 2002/58/CE into

complies with the provisions of the GDPR (Article 28.1 GDPR) and concludes an agreement with the processor (Article 28.3 GDPR). 5. To the extent that this decision

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

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

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

complaint; b. give notice to the second defendant, pursuant to Article 58(2)(a) AVG and Article 100(1)(5) WOG, that it will not take part in the proceedings

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

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

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

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

1(e) and 5.2 of the DGPS and Article 6 of the DGPS; 2.the defendant has not complied with the obligations imposed by sections 12.1. and 12.2. of the DGPS

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

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

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

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

contentious phase (Article 98 WOG) (own underlining): Preco ntious phase: "Subsection 2. -Procedure vggrgfgggnd ggn the decisions grgnd Art. 94. Once apprehended

the violation of his GDPR rights by the parliamentary committee? The BVwG initially held that the exemption under Article 2(2)(a) GDPR (processing of personal

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

Human Rights. According to settled case-law, it follows from Article 1.2 and Article 59.2 of the Basic Law that there is an obligation to use the Human

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

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

the obligations under Article 6, §2, al. 5 and Article 9 of the Camera Act 1 2. there is a serious indication that article 6, § 2, al. 4 of the aforementioned

provided for in Article 83 of the PGRD and having regard to the assessment factors listed in Article 83.2. of the RGPD, a reprimand (Article 100 § 1, 5° LCA)

union enshrined in Article 7 of the Spanish Constitution. Therefore, such processing would be lawful in accordance with Article 6(1) GDPR. Share your comments

supervisory authorities (Article 58(2) DSGVO), in particular the fines to be imposed (Article 58(2)(i) DSGVO), for which Article 83 DSGVO contains a detailed

Therefore, given that Article 6(1), Article 5(1)(a), Article 5(1)(d), Article 5(1)(c), and Article 14 GDPR were infringed in connection to Article 5(1)(b), the

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

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

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

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1 - hereinafter ZVOP-1); Article 2 of the Information

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

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

this regard within the meaning of Article 2 (2) point d) GDPR. Whichcertain officials of the defendant under Article 5, §2 of the Second Ordinanceare appointed

meaning of Article 4(1) GDPR. Nevertheless, in this case the controller had the right to disregard the request in light of Article 12(5)(b) GDPR, as the latter

established by the GDPR.The principle of liability set out in Article 5.2 of the GDPR and developed in Article 24 are at the heart of the GDPR and reflect the

whether Art. 15 GDPR applies to the investigation files at all, since according to Art. 2 Para. 2 d GDPR, Section 2a Para. 4 AO, the GDPR does not apply

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

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

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

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07, officially consolidated text, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, no. 94/07; hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

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

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

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

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

” 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

individual, it should be clarified at the outset that, in accordance with Article 2 (2) of the General Regulation, the General Regulation does not apply to

before May 25, 2018. 2.2. Consent and the lawfulness of the processing (Article 4, point 11, Article 6 (1) in conjunction with Article 7 GDPR) 121. With regard

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

of the first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07, officially consolidated

Republic of Slovenia (IP), provided a non-binding opinion pursuant to Article 58(3) GDPR. The IP pronounced itself on the use of drones. The question concerned

personal data. This type of health data, the DPA held, belongs to Article 9 of the GDPR and cannot be processed without specific authorization. The DPA then

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

the data subjects, therefore breaching Article 6 GDPR, as well as Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. Thirdly, Article 30 GDPR stipulates that the controller must keep

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

hereinafter “GDPR”; 14See also article 100 of the LCA. 15See section 6.3.2. and sections 94-97 of the LCA. 16 Cfr. Article 94, 1° and 2° of LCA; also

Regulation), hereinafter “GDPR”; 14See article 100 WOG. 15See section 6.3.2. and articles 94-97 of the WOG. 16 Cfr. Article 94, 1° and 2° WOG; also compare the

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

of the first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07, official consolidated

The Regional Court of Berlin held that a right to information under Article 15 GDPR cannot be enforced by way of an interim injunction, since there is no

is done using a water meter and its readout. Article 12(5) GDPR in conjunction with Article 18(1)(d) GDPR does not prevent the charging of an administrative

infringements of Article 5(1)(f), Article 24, and Article 32 GDPR, and to the objection of the IT SA on the possible infringement of Article 5(2) GDPR, the EDPB

meetings, one of the legal bases for the processing of personal data from Article 6(1) GDPR must be provided. The DPA suggested to determine the rules regarding

of the first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07, officially consolidated

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter: ZVOP-1), and 2 Article 43 of the Information

such as an insurance company, should have an adequate legal basis under Article 6 GDPR to lawfully do so. An individual notified the IP about a car accident

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1), and Article 2 of the Information

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1), and 2 Article 43 of the Information

Interestingly, Slovenia still has not implemented fully the GDPR. They are still relying on ZVOP-1, as ZVOP-2 (national data protection act) still has not been introduced

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

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

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

" 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

signatures personal data within the meaning of Article 4(1) GDPR? Is there a legal basis under Article 6 GDPR that would justify the disclosure of the signatures

accordance with Article 4(1) GDPR, according to the DPA. The Court of Appeal of Brussels held that, in accordance with Article 16 GDPR, the data subject

of the first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07, official consolidated

of article 6 (1) GDPR? The Slovenian DPA finds itself competent of deciding upon the legal basis and the conditions of a lawful processing. Article 6 (1)

the GDPR, article 94 of which repeals this directive while specifying that references to the repealed directive s understand as made under the GDPR. 5.

illustrate how the GDPR could be applied to allow the NIJZ data to be used in this way, the IP cited examples from Article 9(2) GDPR, which lists the exceptions

accordance with Article 2 ZInfP autonomous and independent state body that, in addition to the tasks set out in that Article, on the basis of Article 49 of the

breach of Article 13 (2) of the GDPR. 43. Consequently, the restricted panel considers that the company has committed a breach of Article 13 of the GDPR. It

the Slovenian National Institute of Public Health? The IP held that Article 6(3) GDPR applies in this context. As such the legal basis for processing is

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1), and Article 2 of the Information

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

administrative fine under Article 83 GDPR. That question is exhaustively regulated by Article 58(2) and Article 83(1) to (6) GDPR. Thus the concept of an

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP- 1) and Article 2 of

this, the two files have been joined. 4. Pursuant to article 95 § 2, 3° of the LCA as well as article 47 of the rules of order inside the DPA, a copy of

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter: ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the Information

persons and their immediate family members in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. Article 6(1)(c) stipulates that processing is lawful when it is necessary

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1 ) and Article 2 of the Information

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

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1 ) and Article 2 of the Information

of the GDPR? Does unintenional disclosure (via a breach) to a third party constitute unlawful further processing as per Article 2(1), 5(1)(f), 6(2) and Article

paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and 2 In accordance

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

measures referred to in Article 100 WOG. 2 1Section 3, Subsection 2 WOG (Articles 94 through 97). 2 1° to dismiss a complaint; 2° to order the exclusion

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1 ) and Article 2 of

Failure to ensure data protection by default (Article 25(2) GDPR) The DPA also found a violation of Article 25(2) GDPR regarding the controllers “X” icon at the

 : Article 15,, Article 17,, Article 21,, Article 51, paragraph one,, Article 57, paragraph one, litera f,, Article 77, paragraph one, and Article 91 of

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

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the

of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter ZVOP-1 ) and Article 2 of

first paragraph of Article 49 of the Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette RS, No. 94/07-UPB1, hereinafter: ZVOP-1) and Article 2 of the Information

disregarded the provisions of Article 5-1 e) of the GDPR. C. On the breach of the obligation to inform people 65. Article 13 of the GDPR requires the data controller

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

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

measures under Article 24 GDPR and 25 GDPR. However, the DPA considered that in this case, the violations of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and 32 GDPR were sufficient

responsibility – article 5.2. GDPR). It must also implement all the measures necessary for this. effect (Article 24 GDPR). 6. Pursuant to Article 15 § 1 of the

basis of article 62, § 1 2 of the WOG transferred to the Disputes Chamber. 4. In accordance with Article 95, § 2, 3° of the WOG as well as Article 47 of the

Republic of Slovenia (IP), provided a non-binding opinion pursuant to Article 58 GDPR. The subject matter of the opinion regarded the legality of installing

alleged infringement of article 6 GDPR, classified in article 83.5.a) GDPR, and punishable with warning in accordance with article 77.2 LOPDGDD. Nineth. Notified

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

data and a legal basis would be needed according to Article 6 GDPR and the principles of Article 5 GDPR should be respected. The employer who decides that

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

2023. The Belgian DPA found a violation of Article 21(2) GDPR and Article 12(3) GDPR. Firstly, Article 21(2) establishes the right for a data subject to

deletion under Article 17 GDPR is required. Even in the event of a proper and expert repair, a balancing of interests under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR indicates a

data against unauthorised access as stipulated in Article 5(1)(f) GDPR. The DPA referred to Article 32 GDPR and recommended a logging measure and to keep track

original for more details. - 1 - Business number: Usž-670 / 21-2 Business number: Usž-670 / 21-2 U I M E R E P U B L I K E H R V A T S K E VERDICT The High

(Articles 15 and 17 GDPR). The DPA held that the controller breached Articles 12(3) GDPR, Article 15(1) GDPR and Article 17(1) GDPR by not responding to

the DPA held that the controller infringed Article 12(3) GDPR, Article 12(4) GDPR and Article 17(1) GDPR and ordered the controller to deal with the data

29 section 1 sentence 2 and section 2 and 3 of the annex to the resolution, as being inconsistent with Art. 35 section 3 point 2 of the Act on in connection

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

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

transmitted to the Chamber st 2 Litigation under article 62, § 1 of the LCA. 10. Pursuant to article 95 § 2, 3° of the LCA as well as article 47 of the order regulations

Pursuant to Article 58.2.a) GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 4° WOG, to contact the controller warn that intended processing infringes Article 5.1, b) GDPR and Article

terms of Article 77(1) GDPR. The complainant, however, expected the submission to be processed as a complaint within the meaning of Article 77(1) GDPR. The

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

paragraph of Article 29 of the ZIN and the powers under Article 19 of the ZIN, Articles 2 and 8 of the ZInfP, Articles 50, 51 and 53 of ZVOP-1 and Article 57 and

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

the GDPR, as the data falls under Article 9 GDPR and awarded € 800 in emotional damages. The Austrian Business Code cannot override Article 9 GDPR. There

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

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

conjunction with Article 91(1)(1) ZVOP-1, for which a fine of EUR 830.00 is prescribed, taking into account Article 91(2) ZP-1 and Article 119(1) ZVOP-2 on the application

employer violated their Article 15 GDPR obligations as a data controller. The plaintiff requested information under Article 15 GDPR from its former employer

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

6GDPR,Article 5.1.b),Article 5.1.a)j°Article 13andArticle 27 GDPR due to the current processing activities. 23. The purpose of this decision is to inform the

transparency under Article 12(1) GDPR and Article 14 GDPR, as the controller had failed to fulfill the informational obligations under Article 14 GDPR. The municipality

information about his state of health are defined in Article 4 (15) GDPR as data concerning health. Article 48 of the Employment Relationships Act (ZDR-1),

under Article 4 (11) GDPR when consent is a condition for participating in a lottery, and 2) has the data controller complied with Article 7(3) GDPR and

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

Area exists. Article 3.1 of the GDPR is therefore not applicable. 6. The second case provided for in Article 3.2 GDPR specifies that the GDPR applies to

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

basis of article 62, § 1 of the WOG transferred to the Disputes Chamber. 2 5. In accordance with Article 95, § 2, 3° of the WOG as well as Article 47 of the

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

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

the basis of Article 58, paragraph 2, point b) GDPR and Article 100, §1, 5 ° WOG to be reprimanded for the infringement of Article 25 (1) GDPR; b. on the

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

the provisions as set out in article 95, § 2 as well as in article 98 of the LCA. They are also informed, pursuant to Article 99 of the LCA, of the deadlines

included in Article 15.1 AVG. As a result, the controller has acted in violation of Articles 12.3 and 12.4 1 2 GDPR , as well as Article 15.1 GDPR . 3 5. Specifically

in the data controller" (Article 6, paragraph 1, letter e ), 2 and 3, and art. 9, par. 2, lett. g), of the Regulations; art. 2-ter of the Code, in the text

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

from the scope of Article 16 GDPR, in my opinion, already follows from the word "inaccurate" in the first sentence of Article 16 GDPR and does not need

basis of article 62, § 1 2 of the WOG transferred to the Disputes Chamber. 4. In accordance with Article 95, § 2, 3° of the WOG as well as Article 47 of the

clerk the office Reference book: yes BGHZ: no BGHR: yes GDPR Article 6 Paragraph 1 Letter f, Article 17 Paragraph 1 On the requirements for a claim for deletion

that teachers could withdraw their consent at any time according to Article 7(3) GDPR with regard to these recordings. For this reason is important to understand

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

defining factor for the balancing act under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Second, the court decided that Article 17(1)(c) GDPR obliged a controller to delete personal

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

processing requirement of the Section 2D of the Data Protection Act 1988. 2. Based on the Court’s analysis of Article 29 of the Data Protection Directive

of his personal data would be based 5. 1, a) GDPR, Article 6, Article 12.1 GDPR and Article 14.1 a) GDPR. 67. Moreover, a controller, in this case defendant

is carried out may, under the assumptions of Article 23, paragraph 5 of the ZUS and Article 24, paragraph 2. ZUS, file a lawsuit for failure to issue a

data on the basis of Article 6.1.e GDPR ? - Did the administration sharing confidential data with a third party violates article 25 GDPR ? - Should the administration

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

Litigation Chamber st 2 pursuant to Article 62, § 1 of the LCA. 5. Pursuant to article 95 § 2, 3° of the LCA as well as article 47 of the rules of order

pursuant to Article 9 GDPR, and violated the principle of data minimisation, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. The DPA ordered, pursuant to Article 58(2)(d), to bring

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

basis registering payment arrears with the BKR: either Article 6(1)(c) GDPR or Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. The Court referred to the conclusion of Advocate General

Annexes K 2.1 to K 2.20 arises neither from Section 112 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 1 or 2 BBG nor from Section 113 Paragraph 1 No. 1 or Paragraph 2 BBG nor

first paragraph of Article 91 of ZVOP 1 and when applying the second paragraph of Article 26 of ZP 1, the first paragraph of Article 21 of ZP 1 and the

emphasizes the inadequacy of the provisions of Article 4, paragraphs 1 and 2 and Article 5, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Arrangement, since, as stated, the JSI

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

storage (Article 5.1.b, 5.1.c, 5.1.d and 5.1.e of the GDPR); - Violation of the principle of legality (article 5.1.a of the GDPR); - Violation of Article 10

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

successful legal representation in a procedure under Article 77 GDPR as a damage under Article 82 GDPR from the controller. A district authority had issued

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

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

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

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

pursuant to Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, § 1, 4° of the LCA, to send a warning to the defendant. In accordance with Article 108, § 1 of

could constitute a violation of Article 5.1.a and Article 6.1 of the GDPR. - pursuant to Article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and Article 95, §1, 5° of the LCA, to order

right to access under Article 15 GDPR. Second, the Court considered whether the claimant could have invoked their Article 15 GDPR rights if the data in

HKG ND, Section 85a (1) S 1 HKG ND, Section 5 (1) S 2 DSG ND, Section 46 (2) KomWG ND, Section 51 S 2 WahlG ND PROCEDURE VG Stade, 3 April 2020, Ref: 6 B

a breach of Article 6(1) GDPR and Article 13(1)(c) GDPR. The DPA found that the controller could not seek to rely on Article 6(1)(b) GDPR as a legal basis

Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia) , No 94/07 (hereinafter ZVOP-1), Article 58 (2) (d) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament

accordance with Article 6(2) GDPR and Article 6(3) GDPR for adaptation to the application of Article 6(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(1)(e) GDPR. The court stressed

After considering the objections in light of Article 4(24) GDPR and the factors outlined in Article 83(2) GDPR the EDPB instructed the DPC to impose an administrative

Communications Act (ZEKom-1), the GDPR and the Data Protection Act (ZVOP-1). The principles of Article 5 of the GDPR must be followed and attention must

Buchner, GDPR BDSG, 2nd edition 2018, Art. 5 GDPR marginal 8). Even if the data is “only” incorrect, the requirements of Article 17 (1) (d) GDPR can be met

out SARS-CoV-2 self-testing procedures is Article 6(1)(c) GDPR (the necessity to comply with a legal obligation) and Article 9(2)(h) GDPR, in conjunction

service questioned compliance with Article 5(1)(b) GDPR). Additionally, the provisions of Articles 12(2), 21 and 25 GDPR did not appear to be satisfied because

employment contract (article 17.1 of the GDPR), within 30 days of notification of the this decision; - under article 58.2.c) of the GDPR and article 95, §1, 4° of

€500 under Article 82(1) GDPR due to a controller's delayed response in providing the data subject information pursuant to Article 15(1) GDPR. In September

woman Previous address: S***strasse 2-4/35 2***L*** The leave compartment is to be set up at: N***stelle 2*** F***gasse 7 2***L*** The incoming shipments are

associations under Article L. 761-1 of the Code of Administrative Justice. D E C I D E : -------------- Article 1: The fourth paragraph of Article 2 of the CNIL's

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

lays down the provisions as stated in Article 95, § 2. This article provides in particular in the aforementioned § 2: "In the cases mentioned in §n1, 4 to

defendant 2. Also here is there therefore an infringement of Article 5 at the time of the facts. 1, a) GDPR, Article 6, Article 12.1 GDPR and Article 14.1 a)

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

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

requirements of sentences 1 and 2 are met, Section 2 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 and Paragraph 2, Section 4 Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2 No. 2 and Section 12 do not apply;

follow from Art. 82 (6) in conjunction with Art. 79 (2) GDPR. Art. 82 (6) GDPR refers to Art. 79 (2) GDPR with regard to responsibility. According to this

provided for in Article 15(1) GDPR, which was kept by the Higher Administrative Court. The Court denied the request. Does Article 15 GDPR apply to hand written

provider cannot be considered a processor as per Article 4(7) GDPR, Article 4(8) GDPR, and Article 28(3) GDPR. Therefore, the service provider acted as a data

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

legal basis under Article 6(1) GDPR and in violation of transparency obligations in the privacy policy under Article 5(1)(a) and 13 GDPR. The DPA in the

without a legal basis under Article 6(1) GDPR and for not adhering to the accountability principle as per Article 5(2) GDPR, cf. Article 24. The DPA also requires

for several persons involved. As such, no violation of Article 12(2)n Article 17(1) and Article 24. However, the private employment agency is reprimanded

defendant is Article 159(2)(4) of the Polish Telecommunications Law, in conjunction with Article 30, Article 32(2), Article 42(1) and Article 45(1) of the

the GDPR under Article 2(2)(a) GDPR. Furthermore, the court extensively discussed the material scope of application according to Article 2(1) GDPR. At

confidentiality of data pursuant to Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and violated the principle of privacy by default and by design (Article 24 GDPR). The controller was aware

compliance of the provision in Article 25h, paragraph 2 of the LPPD with Article 10 ECHR, Article 19 of the UDHR and Article 19 of the ICCPR . Considers,

content: [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted] [article quoted]

the basis of article 6.1 e) GDPR read together with articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR. 3) Violation of Articles 12.1, 12.6, 13.1 and 13.2 GDPR: the Inspection

should rely on one of the legal basis under Article 6 and 9 GDPR. Specifically, Articles 9(2)(h) and 9(3) GDPR allow for processing of sensitive data for

controller and processor in the GDPR”, adopted on July 7, 2021. 6 GDPR, Art. 12. 7GDPR, Art. 12.2 and 12.3. 8 GDPR, Art. 12.3. 9 GDPR, art. 12.3. Decision 172/2022

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

(pursuant to Article 95(1)(4) LCA and Article 58(2)(a) GDPR) for the controller because it seemed to fail to comply with Articles 6 and 24 GDPR. The DPA warned

follows from Article 58(2)(i) and Article 83(2) of the GDPR that the IMY has the power to impose administrative fines in accordance with Article 83. Depending

2019: 376, para 4.2.2, of 28 May 2019, ECLI: NL: HR: 2019: 793, para. 2.4.5. and of 19 July 2019, ECLI: NL: HR: 2019: 1278, r.o. 2.13.2.

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

complaint pursuant to Article 77 of the GDPR on the grounds of infringement of the right to erasure of data pursuant to Article 17 of the GDPR and the right to

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

mechanism (see Article 56 GDPR). During the appeal procedure, however, the AEPD claimed that only Article 22 LSSI (which also stems from Article 5(3) ePrivacy

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

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

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

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

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

sessions, within the Article 12(3) GDPR time limit. Moreover, the DPA declared that the therapist had breached Article 12(4) GDPR, as they did not inform

of the obligation to inform individuals pursuant to Article 13 of the GDPR 38. Article 13 of the GDPR requires the data controller to provide, at the time

provisions of Article 3o , Article 4(2) and Article 6(1)(b), all of the GDPR Implementing Law. 57. Under the terms of Article 55(1) of the GDPR, supervisory

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

up the material scope of application of Article 2 paragraph 1 GDPR; an exception under Article 2 paragraphs 2 to 4 is not apparent.Within the official

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

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

and the lack of control by Vodafone on that; - A € 2 000 000 fine for the infringement of Article 44 GDPR: due to the carrying out of international transfers

right of opposition of persons pursuant to Article 21 of the GDPR 60. According to Article 21.2 of the GDPR: “when the personal data are processed for

provided for by the GDPR. With regard to article 3 of the law of January 6, 1978: As to the scope of this article 3:9. According to I of article 3 of the law

personal data (Article 4(2) GDPR) and the operator of video surveillance is responsible for complying with the principles set out in Article 5 GDPR, including

communication. 2 • ICO. Information Commissioner's Office (4) A subscriber shall not permit his line to be used in contravention of paragraph (2)." 5. Section

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

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

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

relationships are not conclusive when establishing controllership pursuant to Article 4(7) GDPR. A number of data subjects attended a festival, during which they were

EDPB. 2 COMPETENCE OF THE EDPB TO ADOPT AN URGENT BINDING DECISION UNDER ARTICLE 66(2) GDPR 2.1 Existence of a request pursuant to Article 66(2) GDPR coming

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

associations based on Section 2 (2) sentence 1 no. 11 GDPR against GDPR Violations in accordance with Art. 80 Para. 2 GDPR can, provided that the data processing

12(5)(1) GDPR apply. However, it leaves open whether the material scope of application of the GDPR is opened or not opened due to Article 2(2)(a) GDPR. In any

up the material scope of application of Article 2 paragraph 1 GDPR; an exception under Article 2 paragraphs 2 to 4 is not apparent.Within the official

provisions of the GDPR under national law implementing Article 85 GDPR. Processing can be based on legitimate interests under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. In 2019, the

interests of the data subject. 174 (4.2.2.) Article 9 (2) (h) GDPR confirms the provision of Article 9 (2) (b) GDPR in relation to the health sector (Weichert

Art. 3 para. 1 BGB § 307 para. 1, para. 2, para. 3 TMG § 3 para. 2 p. 1, § 13 As. 4 p. 1 GDPR Art. 99 para. 2 Guiding principles: (1) The operator of a

account the purpose of limitation principle (Article 5(1)(b) GDPR) and data minimization (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR). For example, the Court noticed that the data

paragraph 4 of Schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 2018 is contrary to Article 23 of the GDPR and Article 23 of the UK GDPR: [2021] EWCA Civ 800, [2021]

controller violated Article 6 GDPR because it had no legal basis to disclose the email addresses. It reasoned that Article 6(1)(a) GDPR was not applicable

pronounce on the applicability of the GDPR in the context of a claim ? 2.2. Article 78 (1) and (2) of the GDPR, and/or Article 47 of the Bill of Rights fundamental

the meaning of the provisions of article 3-2)-b) of the GDPR and therefore falls within the territorial scope of the GDPR and the provisions of the Data

under Article 66(2) GDPR.......... 15 2.1 The SA has taken provisional measures under Article 66(1) GDPR....................................... 15 2.2 Existence

of: 1. Article 5.1.f) and 5.2 of the GDPR, Article 24.1 of the GDPR, Article 25.1 of the GDPR and Articles 32.1 and 32.2 GDPR; 2. Articles 35.1, 35.2, 35

the GDPR pursuant to Article 2(2)(d). Article 79 GDPR does not explicitly limit judicial remedies to the rights enshrined in Chapter III of the GDPR. Following

breach of the principle of accountability under Article 5(2) GDPR and Article 33(5) GDPR. Article 5(2) GDPR establishes the principle of accountability which

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

By Article 58(2)(d) of the GDPR, the Commissioner has the power to notify controllers of alleged infringementof GDPR. By Article 58(2)(i) he has the power

paragraph (2) of Article 15-22, the data controller you may not refuse to fulfill your request to exercise your rights according to Article, unless you

not necessarily meet the requirements of Article 32 GDPR. To what extent are the provisions in Article 32 GDPR obligatory and thus, not subject to the preferences

purposes and means of processing, it is actually a controller. Article 24 GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR establish the principle of responsibility, which means that

of Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article 14 GDPR, Article 15 GDPR, Article 28 GDPR, Article 32 GDPR and Article 33 GDPR, as well as of Article L. 34-5

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

freedom (Article 2.2 sentence 2 of the Basic Law) and her general right of personality (Article 2.1 of the Basic Law in conjunction with Article 1.1 of the

consent was given obtained (potential violation of Article 6.1 a) GDPR): ▪ Article 6.1 a) GDPR and Article 129 of the law on electronic communication (WEC)

arising from Article 25 of the GDPR. 5. The breach relating to the obligation to ensure the security of personal data 97. Article 32 of the GDPR provides that:

there was a breach of Article 14 GDPR. Finally, regarding the security of processing, the CNIL indicated that under Article 32 GDPR, the controller must

and Article 58 (2) GDPR (b) condemns the Applicant for violating: - Article 5 (1) (a) and (b) of the GDPR, - Article 5 (2) of the GDPR, - Article 6 (1)

May 2018. 2.2 Follow-up of complaints 2 2.2.1 What has emerged during the proceedings During a control search on 8 June 2018 of complaint 2, the Data Inspectorate

and of the Council ((EU) 2016/679) Article 12(1), (2) and (6), Article 15(3), Article 58(2)(b) and (i), Article 83(1), (2), (5) and (6). Data Protection Act

regarding the controllership, the CNIL noted that Article 4(7) GDPR applied due to the reference made by Article 2 of the ePrivacy directive. The CNIL considered

the aforementioned article . 2. On the conditions for obtaining consent 60. In law, the "ePrivacy" directive provides in its article 2, f), that the consent

(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

violation of Article 7(1) GDPR. D. On the breach of the obligations of information and transparency 81. Article 12, paragraph 1, of the GDPR provides that:

publication of the press release of 17 June 2020 infringed Article 54(2) GDPR and Article 48(1) and Article 64(3) WOG. This press release described that the DPA

ordinary courts (Article 34 GG, Article 40(2) VwGO). Moreover, the Court considered the reference to Article 79(2) GDPR from Article 82(6) GDPR, and the fact

of Article 5(1)(a) and (2) GDPR, Article 6(1) GDPR with regard to the principle of legality; 2. there is an infringement of Article 5 GDPR, Article 24

integrality of the indictments. 2.2. Identification of the controller (Article 4.7 GDPR) 71. In accordance with Article 4.7 of the GDPR, the controller should be

responsibility – article 5.2. of the GDPR) and to implement all the measures necessary for this purpose (Article 24 of the GDPR). 26. Pursuant to Article 5.1.a)

amount of EUR 20,000 (Article 83, paragraph 2 GDPR; Article 100, §1, 13° WOG and Article 101 WOG). 27 94. Taking into account Article 83 AVG and the case

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

compare § 31(2) BDSG). The court further assessed the requirements of Article 82 GDPR in length. It established that the Article 82(1) GDPR requires the

is: 1. a breach of Article 5 of the GDPR, Article 24(1) of the GDPR and Article 25(1) paragraph 2 of the GDPR; and 2. a breach of Article 12 paragraph 1 and

were in violation of Article 5(1)(e) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR, but the DPA dismissed its previous finding of the Article 5(1)(b) GDPR violation. The DPA

fairness (article 5.1. a) and the information obligations of Article 13.2 (a) and (e) of the GDPR). 54. Under Articles 5.2 and 24 of the GDPR, the controller

2022, Article 82 GDPR, paragraph 20; Nemitz, in: Ehmann/Selmayr, GDPR, 2nd edition 2018, Article 82, paragraph 20; Gola/Piltz, in: Gola/Heckmann, GDPR/ BDSG

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

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

of Article 6(1)(e) are met. II.2. Article 5 of the GDPR, Article 24(1) of the GDPR and Article 25(1) and (2) of the AVG II.2.1. Article 5 (2) GDPR, Article

also submits that were the criteria in Article 3(2)(b) to be met, both Article 2(2)(a) GDPR/ Article 3(2A) UK GDPR operate to take this case beyond the material

whether Art. 15 GDPR applies to the investigation files at all, since according to Art. 2 Para. 2 d GDPR, Section 2a Para. 4 AO, the GDPR does not apply

a legal consequence reference to the GDPR pursuant to Article 94(2) of the GDPR. Therefore, the norms of the GDPR, specifically Art. Art. 4 No. I I , Art

should have notified the DPA under Article 33(1) GDPR and the data subjects affected by the breach under Article 34(1) GDPR. Regarding the corrective measure

tried to base the processing on contract (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR) or legitimate interest (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR), the requirement of necessity was not met

cf. Article 35 of the Data Protection Regulation. The order is announced in accordance with the data protection regulation, article 58, subsection 2, letter

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

of Directive 2002/58 and Article 1 paragraph 2 and points 3, 10 and 51 of the GDPR) and in the domestic context also Article 10, paragraph 3 of the Charter

because, under the GDPR, Facebook Norway could not be considered a data controller under Article 4(7) GDPR and Articles 66(1) and 61(8) GDPR were used incorrectly

highly intrusive and therefore could not be based on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Secondly, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR indicates that personal data should be adequate,

from the GDPR under Article 2(2) of the GDPR. 165. Article 2(2) of the GDPR outlines certain types of processing of personal data to which the GDPR does not

Violation of article 24.2 of the Constitution, presumption of innocence. First, it invokes Articles 24.2, 103.1 and 2 of the EC, and Article 6 of the Convention

obliged to comply with the GDPR provisions as a processor, while the controller could invoke the exemption of Article 2(2)(c) GDPR. The court then refers to

Garante found a violation of the processing principle under Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR related to the security of processing which was compromised

the identity of a data subject requesting access. And, following Article 12(6) GDPR, if there is reason to doubt the identity, additional information may

legitimate interest. Based on Article 2 (1) of the GDPR, the GDPR must be applied to the data management in this case. GDPR Article 4, point 1: "personal data":

(EU) No Article 5 (1) (a) and (b), Article 6 (1), Article 6 (4) Article 12 (1), Article 13, Article 21 (1) and (2), Article 24 (1), Article 25 Article 1 (1)

official report was drawn up. 2.2 After the oral hearing, the court ruled on September 1, 2022 or as soon as possible. 2.3 In its appeal, ING requested

particular regard to Article 5(2) of the GDPR which established the principle of accountability in respect of a data controller. Article 5(1) provides, in

violation of Article 5.1.c) of the GDPR, Article 6 of the GDPR, Article 9 of the GDPR, Article 12 of the GDPR, Article 35 of the RGPD, Article 13 of the RGPD

administrative penalty fee: 1) Article 5, Paragraph 1, subparagraphs d and a; 2) Article 13; 3) paragraph 3 of Article 12; and 4) Article 15(1). Viking Line Oy

to work. 1 2See, among other things, article 4 paragraph 1 SUWI and the ZBO register of the Dutch central government. See article 2 paragraph 2 SUWI and

(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

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

the meaning of Article 9 of the GDPR must indeed be based on Article 9.2 of the GDPR, read in conjunction with Article 6.1 of the GDPR. 24 This has been

violation of Article 7(4) GDPR. Based on these considerations, the AEPD issued a €2,000,000 fine against Caixabank for infringing Article 6 GDPR in relation

currently pending. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(i) GDPR and Article 83(4)(a) GDPR, the DPA imposed an administrative fine of €220,337 (NOK 2 500 000) against Argon

sanction for both Article 5(1)(f) and 32 GDPR in this case would constitute a double violation of the GDPR, when in fact Article 5(1)(f) GDPR is merely a concretion

found that GDPR does not prevent the claimant from exercising their basic right. In this regard the court referred to Article 6(1)(f) GDPR to highlight

Para. 94Art. Article 82 paragraph 2 GDPR, which specifies the liability regime, the principle of which is laid down in paragraph 1 of this article, adopts

the relevant provisions of the GDPR are Article 14, read in conjunction with Article 12(1). 28. Article 14 of the GDPR concerns transparency in the context

according to Article 58(2)(d) GDPR. First, the AEPD established that the GDPR was applicable under Article 3(1) GPDR or, if not, at least Article 3(2)(a) GDPR

Therefore, consent was not valid as a legitimate basis from Article 6(1) GDPR, in relation to Article 7 GDPR, and thus processing was unlawful. On these grounds

plaintiff derives his legitimacy from Section 2 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 No. 11 UKlaG or from Article 80 Paragraph 2 GDPR and only has to show that it concerns data