Search results

provided for in Article 6(1)(a) GDPR or, as the case may be, Article 9(2)(a) GDPR, and consent is withdrawn according to Article 7(3) GDPR, data must be

request because the processing was necessary according to Article 17(3)(b) GDPR and Article 17(3)(e) GDPR. The controller stated that, according to Chapter 8

pursuant to the Article 17(3)(b) of the GDPR. However, Statistics Denmark has been criticised for not complying with the Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR, namely,

information correctly published at the time. The DPA noted that under Article 17(3)(b) GDPR, personal data shall not be erased if their processing is necessary

by law to retain the data. The municipality relied on Article 17(3)(b) GDPR and Article 7.3.8(3) of the Youth Act to argue that it was obliged to retain

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

to the Norwegian DPA. The DPA found that the exceptions under Article 17(3)(b) and (d) GDPR applied in this case, since the controller had vuewed the information

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

under Article 17 is not applicable as long as the retention period runs, as stated in Article 17(3)(b). Archiving as such does not breach the GDPR. Consequently

rise to the exclusion ground for the right to erasure pursuant to Article 17(3)(b) GDPR. However, the DPA noted that the controller not only published the

pursuant to Article 17(1) GDPR, and secondly, that the DPA must also decide on the scope of the exceptions that follow from Article 17(3)(b) GDPR and 17(3)(d)GDPR

cannot obtain the deletion of the data referred to in Article 17 GDPR, because Article 17 (3) (b) GDPR precludes this. By publishing the decision, the District

such a fulfilment by Article 12(3) & (4) GDPR. For this reason, an administrative fine of 1000 EUR was imposed (Article 83(5)b GDPR). Share your comments

based on Article 17 of the GDPR. There are a number of exceptions to the right to erasure. For example, Article 17(3)(b) and (c) of the GDPR provide that

base the processing of personal data on Article 6(1)(e) GDPR. The court held that pursuant to Article 17(3) GDPR there is no obligation for a government

proportionate (Article 7 and 8 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) and in compliance with Article 6(2) and (3) GDPR. According to Article 6(3) GDPR, the legal

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

consent under Article 7(3), object under Article 21 GDPR or if the processing is in fact compliant with the principles of Article 5(1) GDPR. Simply listing

in Article 17 GDPR (cf. Article 17 (3) b GDPR). In that case, the data subject does not have the right to object as referred to in Article 21 GDPR, because

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