Search results

Gefühlsbeeinträchtigung vorliegt? Critique of OLG Innsbruck 13. 2. 2020, 1 R 182/19b, jusIT 2020/56). [22] 8. It is rightly emphasised in this context that a particularly

Gefühlsbeeinträchtigung vorliegt? Critique of OLG Innsbruck 13. 2. 2020, 1 R 182/19b, jusIT 2020/56). [22] 8. It is rightly emphasised in this context that a particularly

of its creation to the extent that they were public files: OM de Justicia JUS / 484/2003 and Ministry of Economy Order EHA / 114/2008, of January 29. The

[Deixler-Hübner] = jusIT 2019/29 [Thiele; Jahnel, 123] = RZ 2019/11 [Spenling] = MR 2019, 190 [Walter]) and 6 Ob 91/19d (VbR 2019/87 [Schmidl, VbR 2020, 160] = jusIT 2019/55

execution proceedings or even in the opening of insolvency proceedings (ibid. 23; cf. also Heinrich, Bonitätsprüfung im Verbraucherkreditrecht (Vienna 2014)

or the DSG. In its reasoning the OGH referred to its decision 9Ob91/19d of 23.05.2019. The OGH held, that even if that decision (only) dealt with the question

Chamber of the Cologne Administrative Court on November 10, 2021 through Gz.: JUS because of 3 13 L 1707/21 of 10.11.2021 | rewis.io 12 the presiding judge

reporting function on the portal and complained about the field report on December 23, 2019. The published experience report is subjective, but permissible. The

the data protection authority on a Restriction within the meaning of Art. 23 GDPR, this has the legality of review application of restrictions. Does she

applications. The court ruled on 6 of these applications by partial judgment of 23 June 2021. The proceedings were interrupted with regard to the remaining 5

Regional Court for Civil Law Matters of January 29, 2021, GZ 26 Cg 16/20v-23, partially modified, rightly recognized in a closed session: saying The appeal

applications. The court ruled on 6 of these applications by partial judgment of 23 June 2021. The proceedings were interrupted with regard to the remaining 5