Search results

monitoring purposes need to be specified for every surveillance camera in use and "[v]ideo surveillance based on the mere purpose of 'safety' or 'for your safety'

respects the GDPR as well as the specific conditions laid down in Chapter V. The same conditions must also be met for onward transfers to further third

Commisson v Germany; Case C-614/10, Commission v Austria; and Case C-288/12, Commission v Hungary. See CJEU, case C-518/07 - Commission v Germany, paragraph

this Regulation and of measures taken in accordance with Article 58(2); and (v) fulfil any other tasks related to the protection of personal data. 2. Each

matter is largely clarified by the CJEU now. Case Law: In C-487/21 - F.F. v DSB, the CJEU clarified that the right to a copy under Article 15(3) GDPR entails

14 TPG (German Organ Transplant Law). § 284 and § 285 SGB V (German Social Insurance Code V)

(rights of the data subject), CHAPTER IV (controller and processor), CHAPTER V (transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations)

3rd Edition). CJEU in case C-288/2012 - Commission v Hungary, paragraphs 53 to 59. Case C‑424/15, Garai v Administración del Estado, paragraph 52. Polenz

“European Court of  Human Rights, 14  September 2010, Sanoma Uitgevers B.V. v. The Netherlands, EC:ECHR:2010:0914JUD003822403, margin number 83: “Further

carrying out activities which fall within the scope of Chapter 2 of Title V of the TEU; (c) by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household

available'. This provision, together with the others contained in Chapter V, thus contributes to the transfer of personal data in a globalised economy

protection that should be achieved is promoted and delimited in Chapter V of the GDPR. Chapter V of the GDPR creates a three-tiered structure for legal bases for

shall examine, in particular, the application and functioning of: (a) Chapter V on the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations

Furthermore, this choice must be seen in light of Case C-614/10, Commission v Austria. Here, the ECJ established that a supervisory authority's staff could

Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey, 2009, §§ 114-115; M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], 2011, §§ 301-304 and 319; Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], 2012

University Press 2020). CJEU, Commission v Germany, C-518/07, margin number 23 (available here); CJEU, Commission v. Austria, C-614/10, margin number 37 (available

is particularly sensitive, privacy should trump transparency. In C-439/19 B v Latvijas Republikas Saeima the CJEU held that ‘in light [of]… the sensitivity

Articles 6 to 9 GDPR, or the lack of a valid transfer mechanism under Chapter V GDPR. It further includes violations of delegated acts and implementing acts

ensure democratic control and transparency. Case law: The CJEU in Commission v Germany, considered tha the obligation of independent SAs to regularly submit

other mechanism of Chapter V can be applied. As explained by the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), the mechanism in Chapter V acts as a layer structure