Search results

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

longer of importance to society. As a result, and in accordance with Article 58(2)(c) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to comply with the data subject's

the controller had violated Article 5(1)(a) GDPR, Article 12 GDPR, Article 13 GDPR, Article 15 GDPR and Article 25(1) GDPR. As a result, the DPA issued

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

imposed two corrective measures on the controller according to Article 58(2)(c) and (d) GDPR and the fine of 14,420.4 lei, the equivalent of the amount of

the GDPR within 1 month starting from the receipt of this decision; c)ordered the company comply with the Article 5(1)(a) GDPR and Article 5(2) GDPR, as

complete, clear and reasonably certified pursuant to both Article 58(2) GDPR. and Article 21 of N. 2472/1997. Notably, the DPA focused only on the portion

regard to Article 83 (2) (k) of the GDPR, Article 76 of the GDPR, ‘Sanctions and remedial measures’, provides: ‘2. In accordance with Article 83 (2) (k) of

subjects had not suffered any financial harm. Furthermore, as per Article 58(2)(c) and (d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to comply with the data subjects’

objection for data processing under Article 21 GDPR and the principle of liability under Article 2(4) GDPR and Article 24 GDPR. The complainant, the data subject

subject's request to remove the search result link as per Article 58(2)(c) GDPR? Article 87 GDPR gives Member States the right to specify conditions for

Protection Officer shall instruct the controller in accordance with Article 58 (2) (c) of the General Data Protection Regulation to comply with the applicant's

procedure, the AEPD understood that the defendant could have breached article 58(2)(c) GDPR: on the basis of the available evidence, the defendant did not answer

violated Article 5(1)(c) GDPR, Article 5(1)(e) GDPR, Article 12(2) GDPR, Article 12(6) GDPR and Article 25(2) GDPR. In accordance with Article 58(2)(c) GDPR

with Article 5 (1) (c) of the General Data Protection Regulation; and (3) whether the controller should be ordered in accordance with Article 58 (2) (c)

Thus, it violated Article 15 GDPR. The Datatilsynet issued an injunction and ordered the company, as foreseen under 58(2)(c) GDPR, to carry out a concrete

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

circumstances of the specific case (art. 58, par. 2, letter i) Regulation). 4. Order for an injunction. Pursuant to art. 58(2)(i) of the Regulation and art. 166(3)

in line with Article 13 GDPR. On the DSB's request, the controller declared R*** Hotels GmbH as its representative under Article 27 GDPR and sent a reply

data within the meaning of Article 4(2) in the course of proceedings under both Articles 77 and 78 of the GDPR. Article 4(2) refers to disclosure as a