Search results

access to personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed. Recital 83 GDPR also suggests that not all of these are actually relevant. Indeed, the

as the type, scope, circumstances and the purpose of the processing. Recital 83 GDPR shows the standards according to which this balancing is to be carried

explains that Article 33 GDPR relates to violations regarding the security of personal data as described in Article 32 GDPR. Recital 83 GDPR 12 determines that

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

GDPR. Recital 71 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 71 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 28 sentence 1 GDPR, such as Hansen, in Simitis, Hornung, Spieker, Datenschutzrecht

Article 83(4) GDPR. Example: A controller is processing the pictures of data subjects. The controller complies with all requirements under the GDPR, but did

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

Article 25 GDPR or Article 32 GDPR. This provision assigns a proactive role to the controller who has to ensure compliance with the GDPR at all stages

Regulation (GDPR), Article 7 GDPR, p. 350 (Oxford University Press 2020). Heckmann, Paschke, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 7 GDPR, margin

BDSG, Article 6 GDPR, margin number 20 (C.H. Beck 2020). Recital 32 sentence 1 GDPR. Recital 32 sentence 2 GDPR. Recital 32 sentence 3 GDPR. CJEU, C‑673/17

natural persons”. The GDPR does not define what constitutes a “risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons”. Recital 75 GDPR only outlines potential

catalogue of penalties in Article 83 GDPR. National legislators may add provisions to fill these gaps. Under Recital 152 GDPR, these provisions may either be

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 legal

(Article 12(1) GDPR), facilitate the data subject (Article 12(2) GDPR), respond and communicate the measures taken (Article 12(3) and (4) GDPR), the principle

Article 31 GDPR gains an independent significance as it is included the Regulation’s sanctions framework through Article 83(4) GDPR. Article 83(4) GDPR provides

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 Articles

Article 82 GDPR – like almost all provisions of the GDPR – is directly applicable in all Member States without any act of implementation. Article 82 GDPR leaves

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

in other parts of the GDPR. To begin with, Recital 141 GDPR clarifies that an SA must “act on a complaint”. Article 57(1)(f) GDPR, in turns, establishes

of Articles 13 or 14 GDPR and Article 15(1) GDPR often overlaps, the controller has a different obligation under Article 15 GDPR to include the ex-post

processing of personal data of deceased persons. Article 2 GDPR sets out the material scope of the GDPR. Paragraph 1 clarifies that the Regulation applies 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 make any

(Article 12 GDPR), information (Articles 13 and 14 GDPR), access (Article 15 GDPR), rectification (Article 16 GDPR), erasure (Article 17 GDPR), restriction

14(2)(g) and 15(1)(h) GDPR. Recital 50 GDPR. Dix, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker gen. Döhmann, Datenschutzrecht, Article 13 GDPR, margin number 20 (C.H

the 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

of the most innovative elements in the GDPR related to the accountability principle (see Articles 5(2) and 24 GDPR). This provision regulates the cases in

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

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 its

purposes outlined in Article 23(1)(a) to (j) GDPR (e.g. national and public security) as well as Recital 73 GDPR (e.g. protection of human life). In any case

personal data as well (see Recital 163 GDPR). Tosoni in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 98 GDPR, p. 1315 (Oxford University

22(2)(c) GDPR. Finally, decisions based on explicit consent are also subjected to the safeguards laid down in Article 22(3) GDPR. Article 22(3) GDPR lays down

compliance with the GDPR. Article 28(3)(h) GDPR enables such a task in case processors are used. According to Article 28(3)(h) GDPR, the processor should

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

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 is also

out data relating to deceased persons, this Recital confirms Recital 27 GDPR, according to which the GDPR “does not apply to the personal data of deceased

Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 55 GDPR, page 909 (Oxford University Press 2020). See Recital 20 GDPR and CJEU, in C-245/20 - Autoriteit

Berlin. If their behaviour is monitored by an app, the GDPR applies. In light of Recital 14 GDPR and the EDPB guidelines, the targeting criterion covers

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

under the GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 94 GDPR Kühling, Raab, in Kühling, Buchner, GVO BDSG, Article 94 GDPR, margin numbers

consideration when the GDPR was drafted. There is consequently no need to 'balance' the GDPR against other rights for a second time, as the GDPR is already the

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

You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 36 GDPR Recital 89 GDPR. Article 36 GDPR must therefore be read as one   element within a wider framework

Article 79 GDPR, margin number 14 (rdb.at 2018). Jahnel in Jahnel, DSGVO, Article 79 GDPR, margin number 29 (Jan Sramek 2021). See Recital 141 GDPR. Moos,

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

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

Article 45(5) GDPR (revocation, change of such determinations); Articles 46(2)(c) and (d) GDPR (standard protection clauses); Article 47(3) GDPR (formats and

(Articles 55-59 GDPR). The GDPR provides for exceptions from provisions entailed in Chapter VI (independent supervisory authorities). Article 85(2) GDPR mandates

Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 27 GDPR, pp. 595-596 (Oxford University Press 2020). Recital 80 sentence 5 GDPR. Ziebarth, in Sydow,

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 cross-border

interpreted Recital 144 GDPR to have limited the scope of Article 81 GDPR, as applying only to proceedings instigated under Article 78 GDPR. The first sentence

Articles 13 or 14 GDPR. This can be drawn from the final sentence of Article 11(1) GDPR. It must be assessed with the utmost attention whether GDPR provisions

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 is

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

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

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 concrete

Category:Article 86 GDPR At para. 120 Kranenborg, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 86 GDPR, p. 1216 (Oxford University

the scope of the LED from the scope of the GDPR. Article 10 GDPR is intended to extend the protection of the GDPR to the processing of certain criminal data

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

Article 72 GDPR regulates the Board's voting procedure. Generally, the GDPR grants the EDPB a high degree of autonomy. In particular, Article 72(2) GDPR entitles

provisions of the GDPR. This decision refers to the Administrative cooperation between SAs (covering cooperation under Articles 56, 60, 61 and 62 GDPR) and the

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. In these cases

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

true also under Article 91 GDPR”. See, Tosoni, in Kuner et al., The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 91 GDPR, p. 1263 (Oxford University

authority. Article 61(1) GDPR regulates how independent authorities are to cooperate to enable the uniform application of the GDPR. Supervisory authorities

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, across

large-scale, or involve processing of data under Article 9 GDPR or Article 10 GDPR. Recital 97 GDPR clarifies that the core activities of a controller are

application of Article 65(1)(a) GDPR, (13 April 2021), margin number 57 (available here). See also Recital 143 GDPR. See Article 78(2) GDPR. Hijmans, in Kuner et

provisions of the GDPR require the controller to keep track of individual recipients. For example, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR and Article 19 GDPR require the disclosure

provisions under Article 75(3) GDPR. The employees of the Board's secretariat only report to the Chair (Recital 140 GDPR). In this respect, they are therefore

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

sors_en Recital 121 GDPR. Hijmans, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 53 GDPR, p. 888

5(1)(d) GDPR gives the controller some leeway to continue processing inaccurate data - see more details under Article 5(1)(d) GDPR. Article 16 GDPR, titled

60, 63, 64 and 65 GDPR) immediately adopt provisional measures intended to produce legal effects on its own territory. Article 66 GDPR creates strict conditions

purpose (Article 52(4)(5)(6) GDPR). Elements of SAs' complete independence are also addressed in Article 53 GDPR and Article 54 GDPR. The CJEU in the Case of

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 Regulation's entry into force

exclusion of Article 82 GDPR is confirmed by the last sentence of Recital 142 GDPR. In addition, Article 80(2) GDPR does not permit Member States to allow NPOs

differences between portability and access under Article 15(3) GDPR. According to Recital 68, the data should be available in an "interoperable format"

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 forth

prevention (Article 23(1)(a-j) GDPR) allow for far fewer GDPR restrictions than those granted by freedom of expression. Article 85(2) GDPR poses one condition for

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

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, and

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

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

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

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

in Category:Article 74 GDPR For more on this point, see Article 72 GDPR. Dix in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 74 GDPR, margin number 7 (C.H. Beck

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

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, the applicant

outlined under other Articles of the GDPR, namely in Articles 51, 52 and 53 GDPR. The second objective, under Article 54(2) GDPR, seeks to regulate the confidentiality

encompasses other obligations of controllers under the GDPR. EDPB: This extends to various obligations under the GDPR, including but not limited to the implementation

Article 19 GDPR therefore requires controllers, subject to certain exceptions, to communicate their exercise to recipients under Article 4(9) GDPR. The first

mentioned in Recital 167 GDPR and Article 291 TFEU, the aim of implementing acts is to “ensure uniform conditions for implementing” the GDPR. In its GDPR Certification

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

of the European Union ("TFEU"), within the scope of the GDPR. The function of Article 92 GDPR is to lay down conditions for the delegation of power as

of the GDPR enforcement across the Member States. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 64 GDPR Caspar in Kühling, Buchner, GDPR Article

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

Category:Article 47 GDPR Kuner, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Update of Selected Articles, Article 68 GDPR, p. 194 (Oxford

progress. Fill in the name used for the recital if you use it so we can ensure a somewhat streamlined practice. Recital 1: The protection of natural persons

when passing the GDPR. In fact, all but one EU Member State (who has sought higher protections) have voted in favor the GDPR. The GDPR is not just consisting

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 Commission

enforcement of the GDPR. → You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 59 GDPR Selmayr, in Ehmann, Selmayr, DS-GVO Kommentar, Article 59 GDPR, margin number

undefined in the GDPR. “Expertise” is only referred to again under Article 41(2)(a) GDPR, although briefly. Additionally, Article 41(1) GDPR specifies that

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

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

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 customer

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

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

Article 46 GDPR. In 2020, noyb lodged a complaint with the Austrian DPA alleging that the controller breached the provisions of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

justification or basis for the processing, violating Article 9 GDPR. AEPD highlighted that Recital 46 GDPR already recognizes that, in exceptional situations, such

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

of Chapter V GDPR. The complaint was transferred to the Swedish DPA in its quality of lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 56 GDPR. Following the

e) of the GDPR). 8.1.4. As for breaches of Articles 5.2. and 24 of the GDPR 88. Article 24.1 of the GDPR which covers Chapter IV of the GDPR devoted to

subject pursuant to Article 9 (2) (a) of the GDPR ΕΙΣ/7564/05.11.2019 and the invocation of recital 47 of the GDPR 2016/679, inter alia, informed the Authority

damage which arose as the consequence of an infringement of the GDPR. Recitals 4 to 8 GDPR indicate that the aim of the Regulation is to establish a balance

32(1)(b), Article 32(1)(c) and Article 32(1)(d). d, 32(2), 58(2)(i) and 83(3), 83(4)(a), 83(5)(a) of Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the

5(1)(a) GDPR? Is the information relating to personal data processing operations easily accessible within the meaning of Articles 12 and 13 GDPR? Is the

laid down in the GDPR, so that the general conditions for claims were decisive, unless the GDPR contained special rules; even under the GDPR, only non-material

losses physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the GDPR states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. SEVENTH: Notification of the aforementioned initiation

well 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),

gas distribution company €12,000 for a violation of Article 5(1)(f) of the GDPR. A customer of a gas distribution company (Madrileña Red De Gas, S.A.U) complained

Article 83(4) to (6) of the GDPR. This view, in the Court's opinion, is correct. The Court stressed that when creating Article 83 (4) to (6) GDPR, the European

fulfilment provided by Article 12(3) & (4) GDPR. For this reason, an administrative fine of 1000 EUR was imposed (83(5)b GDPR). Lastly, the HDPA held that the College

of access under Article 15 GDPR? By denying the complainant access, did the respondent infringe Articles 12(1) or 12(2) GDPR? The NAIH that the complainant's

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

transparency), Article 12(1), Article 7, Article 13 and Article 14 GDPR, the corresponding GDPR recitals (32, 39, 42, 47, 58, 60, 61, and 72), as well are Articles

serious breach of the GDPR. The violation of Article 17, 1., a) constitutes also a violation of an essential principle of the GDPR and constitutes at least

alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the RGPD, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notification of the aforementioned start-up agreement in accordance

information.” Recitals 39 and 60 of the GDPR help clarify the scope of the right of information provided to interested parties. Recital 39 establishes:

point f, point g and point i and with Article 83 paragraph 2 and 3, Article 83 paragraph 5 point a, Article 83 paragraph 7 of the Regulation of the European

principle enclosed in Article 5(1)(b) GDPR. On this matter, the AEPD argued that, according to Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Recital 39 and Article 6(1)(f), an interest

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

amount of the fine, the criteria specified in the same article 83. 40. Article 83 of the GDPR provides: 1. Each supervisory authority shall ensure that administrative

party, for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notification of the Commencement Agreement, through

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

a) of paragraph 5 of article 83 both GDPR; ii. The combined provisions of Articles 12 and 13 and Article 83(5)(b) both GDPR; iii. The combined provisions

kind of complementary measure). The criminal provisions of Sections 83.4 to 83.6 GDPR allow the imposition of an administrative fine for most infringements

administrative fines set out in Article 83.5 of the AVG. 51. Taking into account the criteria contained in article 83.2 of the AVG as well as the case law

in Article 25 GDPR. Additionally, the AEPD concluded that the controller had violated Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, noting that although the GDPR does not demand

Article 34(1) GDPR as it failed to communicate the data breach to its users in an appropriate way. In this, the DPC also referred to Recital 86 GDPR which foresees

no consent in the event of silence, default boxes or inactivity. Recital 43 of the GDPR states that: Consent is presumed not to have been freely given if

in Article 83.7 GDPR, but it is in any case established that in its interpretation the context of Article 83.7 GDPR and the purpose of the GDPR. 26. The

of article 83, the aforementioned RGPD provides the possibility of sanctioning with warning, in relation to what is indicated in the Recital 148: "In the

individuals. " . 2.5.5. With regard to Rule 32 of the Rules of Procedure, recital 83 of the Rules of Procedureadds that:"To maintain security and avoid processing

to 2019 that it was operating. Following Article 83(5)(a)GDPR, read in the lights of Recital (148) GDPR, the AEPD issued a reprimand to the owner of the

infringement at stake is subject to a fine according to Article 83.5 GDPR, in the lights of Recital (148) GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles

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 compliance

prohibition of processing sensitive data under Article 9(2)? Were there any other GDPR violations incurred by the processing? The DPA held that there was no lawful

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

the processing operations were halted). The IMY took into account Recital 75 and 76 GDPR in order to carry out an assessment of the responsibilities of the

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

hours of employees without having informed them in accordance with Article 13 GDPR. The AEPD received a letter filed by the interested party against the respondent

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

institutions, the child's best interests must be a primary consideration'; - recital 38 of the Regulation, according to which children deserve specific protection

The DPA assessed the appropriate sanctions in accordance with Article 83(2) GDPR and suggested a fine of approximately €67,000 (DKK 500,000). The DPA in

administrative sanction to be imposed, we should read certain recitals of the RGPD, among others, recital 148, which indicates the following: 'In order to strengthen

was in violation of Article 13 GDPR. For this violation, the DPA fined the controller €2,000 pursuant of Article 83(5) GDPR. The DPA also ordered the controller

other GDPR provisions, such as those related to the transfer of personal data to third countries. The IMY took into account Recital 75 and 76 GDPR in order

(Regulation General Data Protection, hereinafter RGPD) typified in article 83.5 of the aforementioned rule, granting a period of ten days to present allegations

provisions of the GDPR that are directly applicable do not supersede the provisions of the VStG and to the extent that Art. 83 (8) GDPR and recital 148 are ordered

described in the conclusion (Article 83.2, c) AVG 83.2 (c) AVG); the absence of previous relevant infringements (Section 83.2 (e) AVG), as well as the cooperation

Article 13 of the GDPR GDPR. The form used violated Article 13 of the GDPR conduct that is subsumi- ble under Article 83(5) of the GDPR, which provides:

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this sense, recital 83 of the GDPR states that: "(83) In order to maintain security and prevent processing from

f) of the GDPR, typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, a warning sanction and for a violation of article 32 of the GDPR, typified in article 83.4 of the

AB for violating Article 17 GDPR by not deleting personal data of the complainant without undue delay and Article 23 GDPR by providing incorrect information

of the general information duty included in Article 13 GDPR. Is this a violation of Article 13 GDPR? The AEPD held that there had been a violation of Article

as well as Art. 57 sec. 1 lit. a), art. 58 sec. 2 lit. i), art. 83 sec. 1 - 3 and art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) in connection with Art. 33 sec. 1 of the Regulation

DPA should have paid more attention to the following factors: (Article 83 GDPR) The Airport had fully cooperated with the DPAs during the procedure The

(Articles 83(4) and (5) GDPR) 7.36 The infringement of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR falls within Article 83(5)(a) GDPR, whereas Article 32 falls within Article 83(4)(a)

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

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

the administrative sanctions referred to in art. 83, para. 4 and 5, of the GDPR. In this regard, art. 83, par. 3, of the RGPD, provides that «If, in relation

understood as made to the GDPR , in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. Similarly, it appears from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

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

article 12, second paragraph, of the GDPR. 78. Recital 59 of the GDPR further clarifies the standard in Article 12 of the GDPR: “There should be arrangements

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

regarding the consent request and referred to Article 7 GDPR and Recital 32 GDPR. Specifically, the use of pre-ticked boxes rendered consent invalid, resulting

35(7) GDPR, for not complying with the principle of transparency under Article 5(1) GDPR and for not anonymising the data under Article 25(1) GDPR, among

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 the

with NIF *** NIF.1 , for a violation of Article 58.1 of the GDPR,typified in Article 83.5 of the RGPD, with a warning sanction.Likewise, the procedure

own security protocols. This therefore breached Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR. The initial sanction for infringing Article 5(1)(f) was a fine

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

Vodaphone violated Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, as interpreted in the light of the last sentence of the recital 39 GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs

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

sensitive personal data under Article 9 GDPR and their lack of valid consent to do so under Article 6(1) GDPR. In 2020, the Norwegian Consumer Council

and art. 57 sec. 1 lit. a, art. 58 sec. 2 lit. i, art. 83 sec. 1-3, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a and art. 83 sec. 5 lit. and in connection with Art. 5 sec. 1 lit

violated the GDPR. A citizen submitted a complaint before the AEPD stating that privacy policy of www.banderacatalana.cat did not comply with the GDPR. GRUP BC

Article 83 of the GPRS, the said Regulation Article 58(2)(b) provides for the possibility of a warning in relation to with what is stated in Recital 148:

to the GDPR, imposed a fine in the amount of € 10.000 and ordered Cavauto srl. to communicate the proposed changes in view of compliance with GDPR. The Italian

laid down in the GDPR, so that the general conditions for claims were decisive, unless the GDPR contained special rules; even under the GDPR, only non-material

of the GDPR and may be constituting the offense classified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned Regulation 2016/679. In this sense, Recital 40 of the

the GGC. 2(i) of the GDPR, the effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative fine provided for in Article 83 of the GDPR, both to remedy compliance

amount of the fine, the criteria specified in the same article 83. Article 83 of the GDPR provides that Each supervisory authority shall ensure that the

subjects, according to Article 33(1) GDPR and Article 34(1) GDPR? The PUODO held that the insurance company infringed the GDPR provisions, failing to notify a

the publication of the judgment breach the GDPR? The AEPD held that the respondent’s actions violated the GDPR Article 5(1)(a) requirement that processing

However, the DPA concluded that the controller did not violate Article 15(2) GDPR by asking for more information to identify the data subject when the data

6.1.f) GDPR) and in this balancing the considerations of the GDPR related to Art. 6.1.f) GDPR eligible [...] be taken, in particular Recital 47. Thus

with the power conferred by Article 58(2)(d) and (f) and Article 83(3) and (5) GDPR, imposed to Fastweb multiple corrective measures and a fine of € 4

meaning of Article 83 and recital 148 of the Regulation”. The Garante hence reprimanded Barclays pursuant to Article 58(2)(b) GDPR. Share your comments

i), Art. 83 sec. 1-3, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) in connection with art. 28 sec. 1, 3 and 9, art. 33 sec. 1 and art. 34 sec. 1 and 2 and art. 83 sec. 5 lit

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

processing of personal data is carried out in accordance with the GDPR. In doing so, the GDPR requires, among other things, that the nature and scope of the

understood as references to the GDPR, in accordance with Article 94 of the latter. 34. Similarly, it follows from recital 173 of the GDPR that this text explicitly

established in article 6 of the GDPR, for which they suppose the commission of an offense classified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, which gives rise to the application

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

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

consent under Article 8 GDPR also apply? Did the defendant, as the controller, fail to adhere to the data transparency (Article 5(1)(a) GDPR) and the data minimisation

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

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

the claimed, by thealleged violation of Article 5.1.c) of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of theRGPD. FIFTH: Consulted the database of this Agency on

can be classified as 'minor' infringements in the light of Article 83(2) and recital 148 of the Rules of Procedure and that, therefore, it may be sufficient

with the GDPR. Especially, if the installation of surveillance camera is contrary to the data minimisation principle, under Article 5(1)(c) GDPR. First,

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

with the article 83.1 of the GDPR. In order to determine the administrative fine to be imposed, to observe the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, which

negligently (GDPR Article 83 (2) point b). (ii) The Authority has not previously established a relevant data protection violation against Customer 1 (GDPR Article

of Article 32 GDPR in conjunction with Article 5(1)(f) GDPR? The Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) found that the controller violated Article 32 GDPR as they had not

accordance with Article 6(1)(f) GDPR? - Does the controller process audio and video data in accordance with 5(1)(c) GDPR? - Does the information provided

fines as provided for in Article 83 of the RGPD, except against the State or municipalities. 54. Article 83(1) of the GDPR provides that each supervisory

the provisions of the GDPR, in particular Article 5 (1) GDPR, article 24 and article 28 GDPR, all this based on article 58.2, d) GDPR and article 100, §1

entrepreneur. The DPA found that the controller violated Article 31 GDPR and Article 58(1)(e) GDPR and issued a warning to the entrepreneur. The entrepreneur was

to be imposed, they mustobserve the provisions contained in articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD, whichpoint out:"one. Each supervisory authority shall ensure

administrative sanction envisaged by art. 83, par. 4 and 5 of the Regulation, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, lett. i), and 83, par. 5, of the same Regulation as

data subject under Article 21(1) GDPR had been violated by the PAR. Did Mrs AAA have a right to object under Article 21 GDPR? Had the PAR infringed this right

constitutive of the offense typified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned Regulation 2016/679. In this sense, Recital 40 of the RGPD states: " (40) For the treatment

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

Articles 5 and 6 GDPR? The AEPD held that publishing personal data on Twitter without the consent of the claimant is a violation of Article 6 GDPR, due to the

to Article 13 (1) of the GDPR of what is written in paragraph Recital (39) of the GDPR and Article 5 (1) point a) of the GDPR stipulate that the information

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

causality between the "GDPR breach" and the "damage". Article 82(1) GDPR requires that the damage occurs as a result of a specific GDPR breach. Although it

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

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

conjunction with Article 83, paragraph 4, of the GDPR and article 14, third paragraph, of the UAVG is authorized to apply to GDPR breaches None administrative

damage physical, material or immaterial. In the same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that "(83) In order to maintain security and to prevent the processing

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

consequent infringement of the data minimisation principle (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR). The decision is the consequence of a complaint submitted by a Spanish citizen

damages, material les or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent treatment from

51 51and imposed a fine on him [Article 83 (2) (e) of the General Data Protection Regulationand (i)].Article 83 (2) of the General Data Protection Regulation

violation of the GDPR? The AEPD held that the senders of the email violated the principle of data confidentiality under Article 5(1)(f) GDPR, by revealing

fraud prevention under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. Did the company’s policy breach Article 6 or any other articles of the GDPR? The Garante held that the policy breached

doubts about the identity of the person making the request”. Moreover, Recital 64 GDPR require the measures adopted to identify data subjects to be “reasonable”

member states is superimposed (see Recital 146 S 4 and 5 on the GDPR; cf. also Frenzel in Paal / Pauly, GDPR-BDSG3 Art 82 GDPR margin no.1; Wybitul / Haß / Albrecht

administrative sanction pursuant to Article 83, par. 5, letter a) of the Regulation. In this regard, Art. 83, par. 3, of the RGPD, provides that "If, in

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

with the article 83.1 of the GDPR. In order to determine the administrative fine to be imposed, to observe the provisions of article 83.2 of the RGPD, which

constitutes personal data according with Article 4(1) GDPR therefore its processing falls within the scope of GDPR. The DPA also analysed whether the controller

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

Data Protection Regulation - GDPR). The defendant has a right of refusal under Art. 12 Para. 5 Sentence 2 Letter b) GDPR to. The provision only lists the

administrative as provided for in Article 83 of the GDPR, except against the State or of the municipalities. 62. Article 83 of the GDPR provides that each supervisory

means of such activity, by virtue of article 4.7 of the GDPR. For its part, article 5.1.c) of the GDPR regulates the “principles relating to processing” establishing

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

alleged violation of article 5.1.c) of the GDPR and article 13 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Once the aforementioned initiation

of the GDPR according to Art. 99 Para. 2 GDPR as of May 25, 2018 follows from Art. 79 Para. 2 Sentence 1 GDPR in conjunction with recital 22 GDPR as well

with article 24 GDPR. They are contained in article 25 of the AVG mentioned above and are explained in more detail in recital 78 GDPR. The defendant therefore

guarantee an adequate level of security to the risk (on this point, see also recital 83 of the Regulation in the part where it states that "the data controller

Article 6(1)(a) of the PGRD for all those purposes, do Article 7(2) and Recital 32 of the PGRD require the controller to give the data subject the possibility

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

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notified of the aforementioned start-up agreement

(Journal of Laws of 2019, item 1781) and Article 57(1)(a), Article 83(1)-(2) and Article 83(6) in connection with Article 58(2)(e) and (i) of the Regulation

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

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 or news

meaning of the GDPR, and such processing of personal data did not fall within the scope of the "household exemption". Therefore, the GDPR applied in full

considers that, in accordance with the provisions of recital 63 of the GDPR and Article 15(4) of the GDPR, it is not obliged to respond to them if it would

under Article 13 GDPR. Incidentally, the DPA also found that such a privacy policy was not complete and did not comply with the GDPR requirements. In addition

The Hungarian DPA (NAIH) found a violation of Article 15 GDPR and obliged a controller to grant a complainant access to his personal data. A complainant

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

proceeding personal data under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. Lursoft claim to be have such a legal basis under Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. However, this was rejected by the Latvian

of the GDPR, which implies the commission of an infringement classified in section 5.a) of the Article 83 of the GDPR. Article 83.5.a) of the GDPR, under

d) and article 83, paragraph 4, al. a), all documented regulation.-In addition, under the terms of article 83, paragraph 3 of the GDPR, the fine of € 400

to be imposed, they mustobserve the provisions contained in articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD, whichpoint out:"one. Each supervisory authority shall ensure

[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 Authority

under Article 83.4.a of the GDPR. Assessing the circumstances modifying liability, both adverse and favourable, contemplated in article 83.2 GDPR, the AEPD

infringements committed by DIGI (art. 83.2 e) GDPR). At no time have special categories of data been processed (Art. 83.2 g) GDPR) The degree of cooperation of

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 to compensation

as “anonymisation”. Recital 26 of the GDPR clarifies that anonymous information does not fall within the scope of the GDPR. The GDPR does not explicitly

data in the context of telephone jokes. Article 6 GDPR (legality of processing) and Articles 13 and 14 GDPR (transparency) were infringed. The decision is

with the requirements of Articles 13 and 14 of the GDPR? In relation to Article 13 and 14 of the GDPR, the AEPD held that the information CaixaBank provided

still covered as a "legitimate interest" in Article 6(1)(f) GDPR? How are penalties under GDPR and the Austrian Data Protection Act ("DSG") to be calculated

purposes of the GDPR and that the sanction to be imposed should be graduated with the aggravation of negligence Article 83(2)(b) GDPR, since the controller

amount of the fine, the criteria specified in the same article 83. 97. Article 83 of the GDPR provides: 1. Each supervisory authority shall ensure that administrative

infringements committed by DIGI (art. 83.2 e) GDPR). At no time have special categories of data been processed (Art. 83.2 g) GDPR) The degree of cooperation of

fines as provided for in Article 83 of the GDPR, except against the state or municipalities. 46. Article 83 of the GDPR provides that each supervisory authority

Article 13 GDPR even if the contact form is not operational? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) held that the defendant, PSI, violated Article 13 GDPR by failing to

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

of the data processing, in violation of Article 13 and Article 5 (1) (c) GDPR. The complainant lodged a complaint with the AEPD about the installation

5(6) Date:2023-01-19 Choice of intervention Article 58(2) and Article 83(2) of the GDPR give IMY the authority to impose an administrative fine. Depending

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

personal data of French data subject and held that the GDPR was applicable pursuant of Article 3(2)(a) GDPR. The DPA determined that the controller offered services

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

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 six months

provisions of article 6 of the GDPR, which supposes the commission of an infraction typified in article 83.5 of the GDPR, which provides the following:

violation of the provisions of Article 83(5)(b) of the GDPR. committed, in violation of the provisions of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, allows for an initial sanction

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 legal

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

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notified of the aforementioned start-up agreement

Company claimed that under the GDPR, there is no right that a trade union can exercise. They thought that the justiciability of GDPR is limited only to the natural

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

data under Article 4(1) GDPR, especially because they allow to single out a data subject within the meaning of recital 26 of the GDPR. It is sufficient that

39 sec. 2, art. 30 sec. 1 lit. d, as well as art. 83 sec. 1 - 3, art. 83 sec. 4 letter a and art. 83 sec. 5 lit. a Regulation of the European Parliament

the appropriate category of breaches, i.e. those indicated in Article 83(4) or 83(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/679. The assessment of the severity of the

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

warning to Escuela Infantil (nursery school) for the infringement of Article 13 GDPR. The decision is the consequence of a complaint filed by a Spanish citizen

manner as to the places monitored. However, the EDPB also referred to Recital 47 GDPR, according to which the existence of a legitimate interest also needs

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

(articles 12 and 14 of the GDPR); A breach of his right of access (article 15 of the GDPR); A breach of Article 28 of the GDPR with regard to its status

is the Purpose of the data processing of the claimed person. III Recital 61 of the GDPR indicates: "Information on the processing of their data must be

such acts and uploaded the video to Instagram had infringed Article 6(1) GDPR, for processing personal data without a legitimate basis (namely without

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

LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR. FIFTH: Notified of the aforementioned start-up agreement

following preliminary questions to the CJEU: (1) Is Article 83(4) to Article 83(6) GDPR of the GDPR to be interpreted as incorporating into national law the

fairness and transparency under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, and the principle of accountability under Article 5(2) GDPR. Additionally, the HDPA held that the employer’s

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) GDPR and Article

(2) and 24 (1), (2) GDPR), privacy by design (Article 25 (1) GDPR) and as controller towards its data processors (Article 28 GDPR). Consequently, the Garante

under Article 15(1) GDPR are not covered as such by Article 82(1) GDPR. The court reached this conclusions by looking at Recital 146 GDPR and at the original

paragraph 2 point d and point i, as well as in connection with Article 83 paragraph 3, Article 83 paragraph 5 point a and point b of Regulation 2016/679 of the

to Article 2 (1) of the GDPR, the GDPR applies to the processing of data in the present case. The relevant provisions of the GDPR in the present case are

amount of the fine, the criteria specified in the same article 83". 91. Article 83 of the GDPR provides that "each supervisory authority shall ensure that

LPACAP, for the alleged violation of Article 12 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR, in which it is indicated that you have a period of ten

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

Charter. 61 First, it should be noted that, in the light of recital 19 of the GDPR and recitals 9 to 12 of Directive 2016/680 and by virtue of Article 2(1)

breached provisions, i.e. those indicated in Article 83(4) of Regulation 2016/679 and/or Article 83(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/679. The assessment of

for determining fines set out in Article 83 of the GDPR, in particular in Article 83(2) and 83(5) of the GDPR? 4. Must the compensation be determined for

found that customers’ order data is health data and fall within Article 9(1) GDPR. Amazon does not collect health data stricto sensu but it can draw conclusions

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. The fact

precepts of the article 83.4 of the GDPR correspond to minor infractions and the precepts of article 83.5 or article 83.6 of the GDPR correspond to serious

in Article 83(2) GDPR in deciding whether to impose an administrative fine for the infringement of its transparency obligations under the GDPR (Paras 293

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

fines as provided for in article 83 of the GDPR, except against of the state or municipalities. 91. Article 83.1 of the GDPR provides that each supervisory

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

as well as Article 83 AVG, is justified, taking into account the following considerations elements. 101. Taking into account article 83 AVG and the case

information under Article 13 GDPR, and for the processing of personal data in a manner contrary to Article 5(1)(a) of the GDPR. A data subject submitted a

Article 6.1 GDPR, read in conjunction with Articles 5.2 GDPR and 24.1 GDPR; 5) the performance of a data protection impact assessment (Article 35 GDPR) the framework

only investigating GDPR infringements but also breaches of the Directive ePrivacy, transcribed into French law. It reminded that GDPR and ePrivacy each

against the controller for the infringement of Article 13 GDPR as defined in Article 83(5)(b) GDPR. This initiation agreement was notified and delivered to

violations referred to in article 83.4, 83.5 and 83.6 of the data protection regulation and that Article 83.1, 83.2 and 83.3 of the regulation shall then

17 of the AVG) are included below. Recital 59 of the GDPR further clarifies the standard in Article 12 of the GDPR: Arrangements should be made available

account data under Article 15 GDPR? Is GDPR applicable to a case that was still pending before the DPA on 25. 5. 2018? GDPR applies to cases pending before

justified to impose a data protection fine on Client 1. E Article 83 (2) of the GDPR and Infotv. 75 / A. § considered by the all the circumstances of the

Article 13 GDPR. In the present case, the controller omitted this obligation. The DPA therefore held that the controller violated Article 13 GDPR by neither

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

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

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

Article 5 and Articles 32 and 33 GDPR. First, there was the duration of the infringement under Article 83(2)(a) GDPR; second, there was the categories

par. 2 sec. i of the GDPR, effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative money fine according to article 83 of the GDPR, both to restore compliance

and Article 13 GDPR. The Italian DPA ordered the controller to bring processing operations into conformity with the provisions of GDPR and imposed a fine

option. The AEPD also found that there had been a violation of Article 7 GDPR before the controller allowed the user to choose what specific processing

sec. 1 lit. a) and h), art. 58 sec. 2 lit. e) and lit. i), art. 83 sec. 1-2 and art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) in connection with Art. 33 paragraph 1 and art. 34

in conjunction with Articles 24(1), 31, 32(1) and (2), 34(1), and 83(1) and (2) and 83(4)(a) of Regulation EU 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of

of the GDPR are regulated conclusively in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the GDPR and are regulated in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the GDPR (paragraph

(AEPD) imposed a warning on a Spanish public notary for infringing Article 13 GDPR by not offering the claimant relevant information when obtaining a copy of

c) GDPR in conjunction with Article 5.1 a) GDPR and Article 5.2 GDPR. - Violation of article 13.1 d) GDPR in conjunction with article 5.1 a) GDPR and

of the GDPR are regulated conclusively in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the GDPR and are regulated in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the GDPR (paragraph

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 blogs

fine under Article 83 of the GDPR are regulated conclusively in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the GDPR and are regulated in Article 83, Paragraphs 1 to

violations referred to in article 83.4, 83.5 and 83.6 of the data protection regulation and that Article 83.1, 83.2 and 83.3 of the regulation shall then

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

Articles 6, 7 and 12 of the GDPR. In the contested decision, the Belgian DPA found the infringement of Article 6, 7, 12, 13 and 24 GDPR sufficiently proven. In

morespecifically the articulation between article 15.4 of the GDPR and recital 63 of the GDPR, as well asbalancing the right to access and obtain data against

which it is up to him to implement (article5.1.a) of the GDPR - explained in recital 39 of the GDPR). Different consequencesarising from one or the other

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 beyond

with the principle of lawfulness in Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, as none of the conditions of Article 6 GDPR were satisfied. The data disclosed in the land register

powers of the GDPR are linked to the application of the GDPR. National legislation may assign functions and powers inspired by the GDPR, but can also grant

remedy (Article 12(4) GDPR). Accordingly, as they failed to respond in such a way, the authority had infringed Articles 12 and 15 GDPR. With regard to corrective

Article 13(1)(c) and (2)(a) of the GDPR. II.4. Article 5 GDPR, Article 24 (1) GDPR and Article 25 (1) and (2) GDPR II.4.1. Findings in the Inspection Report

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

privacy policy did not refer to GDPR. Clearview did not have a representative in the Union as mandated by Article 27 GDPR. Accordingly, the activities of

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 took into account

comply with Article 5(2) GDPR. The DPA determined that the controller violated Article 15 GDPR. The DPA stated that Article 15(1)(c) GDPR must be interpreted

Article 32(1) GDPR. The DPA reprimanded the controller pursuant of Article 58(2)(b) GDPR and held that this was a minor infringement (recital 148 GDPR). It considered

with Article 83 of the GDPR:Article 83 of the GDPR imposes the following penalty: Fine of euros According to €10,000 Art. 83 para. 4 lit. a GDPR OJ L 2016/119

view to vigorous enforcement of the rules of the GDPR. 24. As is clear from recital 148 GDPR, the GDPR stipulates that in every serious infringement - therefore

violated Article 6(1) GDPR. However, this violation alone was not sufficient to justify a claim for damages. Pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR, a claim for damages

reply to the request for information. In its decision, the DPA cited Recital 35 GDPR which specifies that data related to health ‘includes information on

processing activities. compliance with the GDPR, including the effectiveness of the measures (GDPR recital 74). In summary, this principle requires a conscious

Article 12(3) GDPR. Therefore, the DPA ruled that because the processing carried out by the controller breached Article 12 GDPR and Article 15 GDPR. Since the

Article 4(16) GDPR." Consequently, the DPA concluded that the cooperation mechanism and procedure set out in Article 56(1) GDPR and Article 60 GDPR did not apply

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 on the

sedeagpd.gob.es 18/21 See the provisions contained in articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the GDPR, which state: "1. Each control authority will guarantee that the

The DPA fined the controller € 5,000 pursuant to Articles 58(2)(i) and 83 GDPR. Share your comments here! Share blogs or news articles here! The decision

to be in violation of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 6 GDPR, Article 9 GDPR, Article 12 GDPR and Article 13 GDPR and started a procedure to adopt corrective

with GDPR provisions, this includes obtaining proof of consent in line with Article 7(1) GDPR. Especially in the context of Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, the explicit

data in violation of the GDPR. The DPA also held that Google had processed personal data in violation of Articles 5(1)(b) and 6 GDPR by sending notifications

responsible, article 6.1.f) RGPD, typified in article 83.5.a RGPD, the provisions of articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD, precepts that indicate: "Each control

Articles 6.1.C and 9.2.i) of the GDPR. 86. In accordance with Article 6.3 of the GDPR, read in the light of recital 41 of the GDPR, the processing of 26 personal

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 on the circumstances

(Article 6(1)(b) GDPR) and legitimate interests (Article 6(1)(f) GDPR), the DPA found that the controller violated Article 13(1)(c) GDPR by indicating an

infringements referred to in Article 83 (4), 83 (5) and 83 (6) of the Data Protection Regulation. In that case, Article 83 (1), (2) and (3) of the Regulation

57 sec. 1 lit. a) and lit. h), art. 58 sec. 2 lit. i), art. 83 sec. 1 and 2 and article. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) in connection with art. 33 paragraph 1 and art

(Article 31 GDPR); - failure to comply with both the accountability obligation (Article 5.2 of the GDPR) and the duty to cooperate (Article 31 of the GDPR) with

breach, pursuant to the obligation expressed in Article 34 GDPR, in conjunction with Article 12 GDPR. Based on this assessment, the DPA issued an administrative

complaining party, thereby contravening article 6 of the GDPR. In this sense, Recital 40 of the GDPR states: “(40) For the processing to be lawful, personal

point b) GDPR and Article 100, §1, 5 ° WOG to be reprimanded for the infringement of Article 25 (1) GDPR; b. on the basis of Article 83 GDPR and Articles

these breaches also entailed a violation of Articles 12(1) GDPR, 5(1)(a) GDPR and 5(2) GDPR. Regarding the information provided by Klarna on the purpose

Articles 6(1)(b), 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(c) GDPR? The Spanish DPA (AEPD) deemed itself competent under Article 58(2) GDPR in conjunction with Article 47 of the

whether the infringement concerns articles covered by Article 83(4) or 83.5 of the GDPR. Article 83(2) sets out the factors to be taken into account in determining

company. Lastly, The DPA found a breach of Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 12 GDPR and Article 13 GDPR regarding the sharing of patient clinical data through

without prejudice to what has already been reported on the provision of Recital 63 GDPR, of explicit protection of industrial and corporate secrets and intellectual

facilitator but, as specified in Recital 80 GDPR, the person who acts on behalf of the controller with regard to the GDPR obligations. The DPA held that

sec. 2 lit. f, lit. g and lit and and with Art. 83 sec. 2 and 3, art. 83 sec. 5 lit. a, art. 83 sec. 7 GDPR - ordered the complainant School to delete personal

infraction classified in article 83.5.a) of the aforementioned Regulation 2016/679. In this sense, Recital 40 of the GDPR states: “(40) For the processing

33(3)(d), as Article 34(2) GDPR prescribes. Therefore, the DPA decided to impose an administrative fine pursuant to Article 83(1) GDPR. It considered the elements

thereby violating Article 13(2)(b) GDPR. In light of the above, in accordance with Article 58(2)(i) GDPR and Article 83 GPDR, the AP considered it appropriate

controller was in breach of Article 33(1) GDPR, Article 33(3) GDPR, Articles 34(1) and 34(2) GDPR, and Article 5(2) GDPR, Firstly, the Polish DPA held that the

provisions of the GDPR do not supersede the provisions of the VStG and to the extent required by Article 83 Para. 8 GDPR and Recital 148 with regard to

definition of Article 4(16) GDPR, and therefore declared its competency to act as the lead supervisory authority under Article 56(1) GDPR. The AEPD then investigated

depending on whether the infringement concerns articles covered by Article 83 (4) or 83.5 of the Data Protection Regulation. Section 25 (4) KBL also states that

Article 83 paragraph 1 and 5 lit. a GDPR in conjunction with § 16 Administrative Penal Act 1991 - VStGArticle 83, paragraph one, and 5 lit. a, GDPR in conjunction

definition of "personal data" in Article 4(1) GDPR. The DPA reminded the controller that, as defined in Recital 26 GDPR, pseudonymisation is a mere technical measure

infringement of article 5.1.f) of the GDPR and article 32 of the GDPR, typified in articles 83.5 and 83.4 of the GDPR, respectively. The startup agreement

excessive for the intended purpose of processing as per Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Recital 39 GDPR. The AEPD issued a reprimand on the controller. Share your comments

Data, https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0033572/2013-03-01. 47See also recital 75 of the GDPR. 12/41Date Unidentified May 31, 2021 [CONFIDENTIAL] processing infringes

system. When the workers asked about the information listed under Article 13 GDPR, they only received a generic answer saying that the personal data were being

proportionate and deterrent. This is stated in Article 83 (1) of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 83 (2) sets out the factors to be taken into account

2022, Art. 82 GDPR marginal number 14). With regard to recital 146 sentence 1 of the GDPR, however, processing must have violated the GDPR (Nemitz, in:

4(1) of the GDPR. I further note that the text of the accompanying recital (Recital 26 of the Directive) is very similar to the text of Recital 26 of the

Articles 57 and 58 GDPR. The NO DPA is the supervisory authority established in line with Article 51(1) GDPR to monitor the application of the GDPR on the territory

Art. 57 sec. 1 it. a) and h), art. 58 sec. 2 it. e) i i), Art. 83 sec. 1-3 and art. 83 sec. 4 it. a) in connection with Art. 33 paragraph 1 and art. 34

DPA initiated supervision pursuant to Article 56 GDPR in accordance with the Article 60 GDPR cooperation mechanism. The handover of the complaint was made

Article 5.1.f) of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.5 of the GDPR and of Article 32 of the GDPR, typified in Article 83.4 of the GDPR. In order to issue said

personal data securely, in violation of Articles 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32(1)(b) and (d) GDPR. Two aspects of the decisions are interesting. First, the

information required under Art. 14 GDPR. recital 60 The defendant requests Recital 61 reject the complaint. Recital 62 As justification, she repeats her

of Art. 9 GDPR do not apply because the plaintiff did not seek to process that kind of data. The legality is thus determined by Art. 6 GDPR. In the absence

Article 88 GDPR, which holds that it is permissible for national laws to provide a greater standard of protection than already given by the GDPR with regard

Articles 30 of the RGPD and 31 of the LOPDGDD, typified in Article 83.4.a) of the GDPR. Likewise, it was proposed that by the Director of the Spanish Agency

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

related to identifiable physical persons (Recital 83, Article 4(1) GDPR, Article 25 GDPR and Article 32(1)(a) GDPR). Moreover, a hosting service provider

Articles 5(1)(a) and 13 GDPR, in addition to Articles 114 and 157 of the Privacy Code. Pursuant to Article 58(2)(i) GDPR and 83 GDPR, the DPA imposed an administrative

personal data [Article 83 (2) (a) GDPR]; - the Customer has infringed several provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation1 [GDPR 83. Article 2 (2) (a)];

17 of the GDPR), the right to restriction (Article 18 GDPR), as well as the right of opposition (Article 21 GDPR) 91. Article 17 of the GDPR states: 1

infringement concerns articles covered by Article 83 (4) or 83.5 of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 83 (2) of the Data Protection Regulation sets out

penalty, are as follows: Article 83 paragraph 1, 2 and 5 lit. a GDPR:Article 83, paragraph ,, 2 and 5 lit. a, GDPR: "Article 83 General conditions for imposing

57 sec. 1 lit. a) and h), art. 58 sec. 2 lit. e) and i), Art. 83 sec. 1 and sec. 2, art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) in connection with Art. 33 paragraph 1 and art

required under Article 13 GDPR, as well as the fact of data transfer abroad, were completely missing. The DPA stated that Article 13 GDPR only provides the bare

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 on the circumstances

authority to verify compliance with GDPR by the controller (the court) involved in the incident. Referencing Article 4(12) GDPR, the DPA found that the event

indicated in art. 83, par. 2, of the Regulation; In the present case, the following are relevant: 1) the seriousness of the violations (Article 83, paragraph

infringement concerns articles covered by Article 83 (4) or 83.5 of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 83 (2) of the Data Protection Regulation sets out

Article 15 GDPR. The Finnish DPA then examined in which format the Company had to provide a copy of the personal data, in light of Article 15(3) GDPR. In this

to be unlawful. The processing violated Article 7(2) GDPR, Article 7(4) GDPR and Article 6(1)(a) GDPR. The controller was fined 2,000,000 HUF (approx. €5

Article 83 (4) of the Data Protection Regulation and up to a maximum of 10 SEK 000 000 for infringements referred to in Article 83 (5) and 83 (6). Violations

the data. 81 82 Respondent's Summary Submissions, p. 30, § 73. 83 GDPR, recital 39. GDPR, art. 4.5°; This is the “processing of personal data in such a

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 on thePrivacy

losses physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the GDPR states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

regarding GDPR-violations against the legal person. The Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSB) had issued a fine of EUR 4,800 under Article 83 GDPR against

determines whether the data processing involves a risk or a high risk. Recitals 39 and 83 also contain writings that provide guidance on it the meaning of the

the Article 83.5 of the GDPR. - Has violated the provisions of Article 32 of the RGPD, an offense classified in the Article 83.4 of the GDPR. - Has violated

Therefore, the controller violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 5(1)(c) GDPR and Article 6(1) GDPR considering that the first camera was also framing

Italian DPA concluded that the controller breached Article 5 GDPR, Article 6 GDPR and Article 9 GDPR and Articles 2-ter as well as 2-septies (8) of the Code

process this data under Article 6(1)(b) GDPR for the performance of a contract, and as well as Article 6(1)(c) GDPR to comply with legal obligations for lodging

alleged 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

administrative sanction envisaged by art. 83, par. 4, of the Regulation, pursuant to articles 58, par. 2, lit. i), and 83, par. 3, of the same Regulation, as

One on hand, the APDCAT stated that under Article 2 GDPR, Article 4(1) GDPR and Recital 14 GDPR, any information regarding administrative procedures for

fining tier(s) (Articles 83(4) and (5) GDPR) 7.56. The infringement of Article 5(1)(f) GDPR falls within Article 83(5)(a) GDPR, whereas Article 32 falls

view to a powerful enforcement of the rules of the GDPR. As is clear from Recital 148 GDPR, the GDPR states after all, it is important to note that for

DPA considered the infringement of Article 5 GDPR, Article 24(1) GDPR, as well as Articles 25(1) and (2) GDPR. Secondly, the DPA addressed the access request

express its opinion, provide an explanation, or raise issues under Article 83(2) GDPR that the DPA would assess when imposing a fine. On 31 January 2022, the

and 7(1) GDPR; Articles 5, paragraph 2 and 24 GDPR; Articles 12, paragraph 1, j° 13 and 14 GDPR; Article 5(1)(e) GDPR; and Article 7(3) GDPR. - order the

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 to Article

58 (2) GDPR (see Art 83 GDPR, which in its (3) and (4) summarises the possible infringements in connection with data processing; see also Art 83(3) GDPR

the GDPR (see statement of objections, page 2, Ad.A.1.). 11See in particular articles 5,1, a) and 12 of the GDPR, see also recital (39) of the GDPR. 12

against accidental loss, destruction or alteration of data. 23. Recital 83 of the GDPR envisages that “[...] the controller [...] assesses the risks inherent

proportionate and dissuasive. The stated in Article 83.1 of the Data Protection Regulation. Article 83.2 specifies the factors that must taken into account

the alleged violation of the articles: -6.1 of the GDPR, in accordance with article 83.5.a) of the GDPR and article 72.1.b) of the LOPDGDD. C/ Jorge Juan

determine the administrative fine to be imposed, the provisions of articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD, provisions that state: "one. Each control authority will

the reference to Article 79(2) GDPR from Article 82(6) GDPR, and the fact that one could argue that Article 82(6) GDPR overrides Member State procedural

satisfaction surveys, because the necessary prerequisites explained in Recital (47) of the GDPR regarding reasonable expectations and other guarantees have not

not override the data subject's right to privacy. Pursuant to Article 17(1) GDPR, the data subject had requested Google LLC (the controller) to remove several

the provisions of GDPR does not exclude the controller from the liability, given that the controller, in light of Article 5(2) GDPR is responsible for

considered together with the voice. It highlighted that, in line with Recital 75 GDPR, risk must be interpreted as any circumstance that may give rise to

mechanism of Article 56 GDPR. The luxembourg DPA started an investigation regarding Amazon's use of cookies and its compliance with the GDPR and the ePrivacy

i), and 83 of the Regulation, as well as art. 166 of the Code, has the power to "impose a pecuniary administrative sanction pursuant to article 83, in addition

Para. 5 GDPR were met in the present case. According to Art. 12 Para. 5 GDPR, the first-time provision of the information under Art. 15 Para. 3 GDPR had to

and 57(1)(a) GDPR, national DPAs are responsible for monitoring compliance with the GDPR (§35 of the Opinion). Under Article 57(1)(f) GDPR, each DPA is

force the controller to comply with the GDPR. In the quantification of such a fine pursuant to Article 83(2) GDPR, the DPA particularly stressed as an aggravating

Based on Article 2 (1) of the GDPR, the GDPR must be applied to the data processing in this case. (31) Recital (47) GDPR: The data controller - including

negligent conduct"; "The Group has recently completed a GDPR audit undertaken as part of Phase 2 of GDPR compliance activities"; "The path undertaken from June

breach of Article 12(2) of the GDPR. Choice of corrective measure It follows from Article 58(2)(i) and Article 83(2) of the GDPR that IMY has the power to impose

sec. 1 and 2 and article. 34 sec. 1, as well as art. 83 sec. 1-3 and art. 83 sec. 4 lit. a) and art. 83 sec. 5 lit. a) Regulation of the European Parliament

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 taken

consider the factors identified above under Articles 83(2)(c), 83(2)(e), and 83(2)(f) of the GDPR mitigating. To account for the action taken by the HSE

infringement for which the claimed entity is responsible is found typified in article 83 of the RGPD that, under the heading "General conditions for the imposition

provided for in Article 83 (5) and violations of Article 32 are covered by the lower maximum amount according to Article 83.4. Article 83 (2) of the Data Protection

also supported by Recital 128 GDPR. Therefore, the court found the independent nature of the church supervisory authorities to be GDPR-compliant. Second

integrity outlined in Article 5(1)(f) GDPR and Article 32 GDPR. Moreover, the DPA found that relying on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR as legal basis for processing notaries'

for GDPR violations before. Thus, the DPA issued a reprimand to the controller for breaching Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 12(2) GDPR and 12(6) GDPR. Share

provisions of the GDPR that are directly applicable do not supersede the provisions of the VStG and to the extent that Art. 83 (8) GDPR and recital 148 with regard

Court of Stuttgart points out that the absence of information of Article 13 GDPR constitutes an unfair trade-based action as understood by § 3 of the national

member states is superimposed (see Recital 146 S 4 and 5 on the GDPR; cf. also Frenzel in Paal / Pauly, GDPR-BDSG3 Art 82 GDPR margin no.1; Wybitul / Haß / Albrecht

impose administrative penalty fees in accordance with with Article 83. Pursuant to Article 83 (2), administrative penalty fees, depending on the circumstances

(Article 83(2)(a) GDPR and Article 83(2)(g) GDPR). It also considered the cooperation of the controller to remedy the infringement (Article 83(2)(f) GDPR) and

Protection Office, pursuant to Art. 83 section 4 lit. a) and art. 83 section 5 lit. a) in connection with Art. 83 section 3 of Regulation 2016/679 and

(“integrity and confidentiality"). In relation to this principle, Recital 39 of the aforementioned GDPR states that “(…) Personal data must be processed in a way

damages physical, material or immaterial. In this same sense, recital 83 of the RGPD states that: “(83) In order to maintain security and prevent the treatment

the GDPR also applied to facts before the above-mentioned date. The Court noted that the entry-into-force of the GDPR according to Article 99 GDPR represents

Article 46(2) GDPR. For these violations, the DPA reprimanded the controller and ordered it to comply with the GDPR (specifically Article 46 GDPR) within 90

data within the meaning of Article 4(1) GDPR and thus cannot be object of an access request under Article 15(3) GDPR. Making reference to CJEU case C-434/16

of Article 35 of the GDPR, Article 32 of the GDPR and Article 13 of the GDPR, typified in Articles 83.5 of the RGPD and Article 83.4 of the RGPD. SIXTH:

administrative fine to be imposed, observe the provisions contained in articles 83.1 and 83.2 of the RGPD, which point out: "1. Each control authority will guarantee

on a large scale. Despite The GDPR does not define what is meant by large-scale processing, both the recital 91 of the GDPR as the Working Party of article

July 2021. 7GDPR, Art. 12. 8 GDPR, Art. 12.2 and 12.3. 9GDPR, Art. 12.3. 1 GDPR, Art. 12.3. 1 GDPR, Art. 12.4. Decision 158/2022 - 6/13 26. Secondly, it