Search results

Justification . Pursuant to Article 78 paragraph 1, Article 79 paragraph 1 point 1 and Article 84 paragraph 1 point 1-4 of the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection

specific categories of information in Article 8 (1) and (5) of Directive 95/46 or in Article 9 (1), Article 10 (1) and Article 10 of Regulation 2016/679, the

and 32, paragraph 1, AVG and further elaborated in article32, paragraph2, preamble, FISHOrdinancesBIO standards5.1.1,5.1.1.1and5.1.2.1. 2.4PhysicalSecurityAccesstoNVIS

were still relevant after 10 years, in part because the data subject was a CSO in a company planning to go public, and the information was deemed to be of

in arts. 47, 64.2 and 68.1 LOPDGDD. II Previous issues In the present case, in accordance with the provisions of article 4.1 and 4.2 of the RGPD, involves

disproportionate burden on it. In addition, the AEPD takes into account two factors: 1) that the main activity of the respondent is not directly linked to the processing

of October 1, of the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations (hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged violation of Article 6.1 of the RGPD

of October 1, of the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations (hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged violation of Article 6.1 of the RGPD

telephone number) from the company *** COMPANY.1 located in the transport city at *** LOCALIDAD.1, *** ADDRESS.1; who went to the company, although they verified

for failing to comply with Article 5(1)(f) and Article 32 GDPR. The initial sanction for infringing Article 5(1)(f) was a fine of €5000 and a warning

relation to the lease number, *** REFERENCE. 1 that we have with you about the property located in *** ADDRESS.1, has been detected in our accounting entries

the Spanish original. Please refer to the Spanish original for more details. 1/13  Procedure No.: PS / 00172/2020 RESOLUTION OF SANCTIONING PROCEDURE Of

(hereinafter LSSI), as provided in article 43.1 of said Law. II Article 85 of Law 39/2015, of October 1, on Administrative Procedure Common of Public Administrations

procedure against the person claimed by the alleged violation of articles 5.1.f) and 32.1 of the GDPR, typified in articles 83.5.a) and 83.4.a) of the aforementioned

October 1, of the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations (in hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the

enforceable, in accordance with the provisions of the Article 98.1.b) of Law 39/2015, of October 1, on Administrative Procedure Common of Public Administrations

October 1, of the Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations (in hereinafter, LPACAP), for the alleged infringement of Article 6.1 of the

social network “*** RED.SOCIAL.1” with your CAM4 alias and the photo from your Twitter profile. East profile of “*** RED.SOCIAL.1” has managed to report it

treatment", details in its section 1 the cases in which the processing of third party data is considered lawful: "1. The treatment will only be lawful

(hereinafter LSSI), as provided in article 43.1 of said Law. II Article 85 of Law 39/2015, of October 1, on Administrative Procedure Common to Public Administrations