Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

Taking into account the applicable regulations, it can be considered that there is a sufficient legal basis for the publication and dissemination of the academic qualifications of the group of university students (eg art. 6.1, sections e) and f) RGPD), without prejudice to the necessary compliance with the rest of the principles and guarantees of the data protection regulations. Given the principle of minimization, only the data necessary to comply with the intended purpose should be disseminated, taking into account the parameters and guidelines derived from the seventh additional provision of the LOPDGDD.

Access by the bodies representing public workers to the remuneration information of these people on a case-by-case basis will be conditional upon the applicable legislative provisions and concurrent circumstances in the specific case. University workers' committee members on the negotiating Commission for the Equality Plan must be able to access the information in the Retributive Register, which must comply with the terms of Article 28.2 of the ET, despite having professional categories with a small number of workers, while remaining those obliged to respect the confidentiality of the information obtained, as well as the principle of purpose.

The opinions of the students about the teaching staff, collected in the free text field of the evaluation surveys of the teaching performance of the teaching staff, have the consideration of personal data of the assessed teaching staff. Access to the individual evaluation reports of the teaching staff by the rest of the teaching staff who teach the same subject in other degrees of the same university must be considered excessive treatment in relation to the purposes of evaluation and improvement of the teaching performance. The communication could be made with prior anonymization.

The complainant, a university professor, sued the university for considering that his study coordinator had violated his duty of confidentiality when he revealed the content of some WhatsApp messages in the face of alleged sexual harassment by this teacher to a student to whom he had sent these messages. The complaint is filed to consider that: 1) the communication of personal data arising from the meetings held by the coordinator of studies with the Dean and the Head of Department, was covered by the legal basis provided in art. 6.1.c) of the RGPD (the coordinator was obliged ex lege to attend and advise the student, and to communicate the facts to the Dean of the Faculty and the head of the Department), and also by the legal basis provided in art. 6.1.e) RGPD (the coordinator communicated personal data in the exercise of the functions of direction and control of a teaching that he coordinated); and 2) the contribution and subsequent access to the messages by the members of the university commission was covered by the same legal bases, because the communication was covered by a protocol of action approved by the university (art. 6.1.c RGPD) , and because the coordinator acted in the exercise of the functions of prevention of sexual harassment in its field of action (art. 6.1.e RGPD).

The doctor of a hospital who treated the complainant during a medical treatment, sent a medical report to the head of the complainant, at the request of the complainant, who requested the sending of this report with the purpose of proving the reason and the expected duration of your medical leave, so that you can receive 100% of your salary. The complainant claims that he requested that an indicative report be sent only from those two ends (reason and duration of the discharge), and the Hospital has not proved that it had the express prior consent to send the other data of health listed in the report submitted, and which had nothing to do with the cause and duration of the treatment referred to, which constitutes a very serious infringement.

Taking into account the principles of purpose limitation and minimization (art. 5.1, sections b) and c) GDPR, there is sufficient empowerment (art. 6.1.c) GDPR and LTC), to communicate to the works council the identity (name and surnames) and, if applicable, the professional category of Foundation workers, which are listed according to the information available in the work census, for the purposes of calculating and contrasting the credit of monthly hours attributed to workers' representatives.

The diffusion of determinate particulars of the investigators, which the consultation refers to, through the Portal of which the responsibles are part, fits at the beginning of purpose, whenever the corresponding order of the treatment with the CSUC establishes the purpose for which the CSUC will treat the data of the investigators, in particular, to give diffusion through the Portal. From the prospect of the principle of minimization the diffusion of this information through the Portal of the CSUC would fit to this principle, since treats itself of data of contact and information related to the academic and scientific production in the one that is related the studied regulations, which foresee the diffusion in the terms pointed out. The diffusion of information about the investigators in reusable format would not be contrary for the regulations of data protection -with the exception of the electronic mail-, since it can give fulfillment to the legitimate purpose that justifies the treatment of the data.

The possibility to treat determinate data that have the Catalan universities, of the university graduates to get itself with them in touch in order to carry out some surveys in the study of work insertion, can be considered that there is sufficient habilitation under protection of article 6.1 e) of the RGPD, always and when the object survey of consultation has the consideration of statistical activity of interest of the Generalitat, in accordance with Law 23/1998, of 30 December, of statistics of Catalonia, and in the expressed terms in the statistical Plan included in the Law 5/2016.

The denounced entity published in the virtual space of a subject listings of the qualifications of all the students registered in this subject, that incloien excessive particulars, since to identify the persons the name and surnames together with the number of complete DNI were used.

In so far as the University orders of the unambiguous, previous, express consent and informed of the affected persons, in the exposed terms in the judgement, it is possible to deposit the data of the researches (engravings) of the projects in open access subsidized by the Program H2020, although it is advisable from spreading them in the foreseen conditions to appraise the ownership, especially, in those suppositions in which deserving data could be revealed of special protection. The recording of physical persons focused on in the movement of the lips while they pronounce preestablished sentences, in order to facilitate the learning of the reading of lips, does not seem that in this case it has to be considered a data processing biometric, in the sense established in the article 9 of the RGPD.