The information on which the search is based has been translated by a computer system without human intervention. It may contain errors in vocabulary, syntax or grammar. The translation may also produce mistakes in the searches performed.
749 results were found for your search terms PERSONAL DATA
Implanting the facial recognition system to carry out the academic evaluations of FUOC university students.
PS 41/2022
The principle of application is violated, since the processing of biometric data by students is not included in any of the exceptions provided for in Article 9.2 GDPR, for the processing of special categories of data.
05/12/2022
Internet publication of the minutes of the Plenum of the City Council and the municipal godfather of inhabitants
CNS 34/2022
Personal data protection regulations do not prevent the dissemination of information relating to deceased persons. The minutes of the plenary sessions, with regard to the acts discussed, must be published in the electronic headquarters of the City Council without including specially protected data categories, or affecting honour or privacy or requiring special protection. In this case, the consent of those concerned should be made available so that the minutes can be disseminated, or the information anonymized should be disseminated. After 30 years, the provisions of Article 36 of Law 10/2001 may come into play. There is no legal basis for the dissemination, with a general scope, of the information contained in the municipal godparents of inhabitants on the city council website, without prejudice to the dissemination of the anonymized information of the godfather.
02/12/2022
Captation of the driver image of a vehicle.
IP 411/2021
A municipal watcher photographs a vehicle with which a traffic offence is allegedly committed, in which the image of the person sitting inside is shown.
29/11/2022
Undue access to clinical history.
PS 43/2022
It is decided to sanction Badalona Health Services for the infringement of the principle of confidentiality, since the complained entity has confirmed that a worker from Badalona Municipal Hospital, managed by Badalona Health Services S.A, would have unduly accessed a third person's clinical history. The proposed sanction is EUR 2 000.
29/11/2022
Communications the personal data of the complainant to a third person.
IP 261/2021
The complainant explained that the Lleida City Council would have provided a third person (the new acquirer of a license) with the document relating to the "Joint declaration of change of ownership of activities", which would contain the personal data (name, surnames, address and number of DNI) of the complainant. However, since it has not been possible during the previous information phase to prove that the communication of personal data is attributable to the Lleida City Council, as the complainant stated, it is appropriate to archive the present complaint.
29/11/2022
City Hall's lack of accreditation of responsibility.
IP 286/2022
The complainant complained that the City Council had revealed her data to a third party (a person who ran a bar and had called her to warn her that she would take a party). He does not provide any evidence or evidence to prove that his mobile phone was indeed revealed. RA is dictated by the lack of evidence to prove the communication of the complainant's mobile phone to the third person. In addition, both the City Council and the person who called her deny that it was the City Council that had provided the data.
24/11/2022
Sending an email to certain corporate addresses of local police officers, from an email address outside the whistleblower.
IP 474/2021
There is no indication that the denounced City Council is the holder of the e-mail account from which a message was sent to certain local agents, criticising trade union behaviour. In this respect, it is also inappropriate to argue that the City Council has filtered information regarding corporate electronic addresses of members of the Police Corps, since, apart from the city council workers who may obviously have access to such corporate addresses, it cannot be ruled out that third parties have obtained this information by their own means (e.g., persons who have provided services to the City Council, or citizens who have related to these public employees).
24/11/2022
Work reports, which include health data of the complainant, within the framework of a disciplinary procedure.
IP 424/2021
It is decided to file the present complaint, given that the accused City Council and, in particular, the Chief Inspector of the Local Police, included references to the data on the person's health reporting - who holds the status of local agent - since these were necessary to resolve the desirability of initiating a disciplinary file against him, for alleged withdrawal from service on health grounds. Thus, this Authority concludes that the processing of controversial personal data was covered by Article 6.1e) - processing carried out in the exercise of public powers - and that the circumstances provided for in Article 9.2 (f) and g) GDPR, which lift the prohibition on processing health data in Article 9.1 (GDPR).
24/11/2022
Possible access to medical data by administrative staff.
IP 429/2021
The complainant complains that they made him send medical documentation by email and that this would facilitate access to medical data by non-health administrative staff. RA is issued since this was an exceptional shipment since the patient requested urgent assistance by phone for the prescription of pain medication and since the last medical report was not yet included in the HC3, since the same one had been issued day at another medical center, he was asked to send it by e-mail in order to carry out the medical prescription. These emails are managed by the administrative staff entrusted with these functions and, moreover, management does not involve access to medical documentation; only if it becomes essential for the performance of its functions. Art. 16 Law 41/2022.
15/11/2022
Revelation of the complainant's health data by a co-worker.
IP 404/2021
RA is being prepared because the complainant was the one who in a workplace revealed his or her COVID (and his/her) results to other partners. He did so for organisational purposes. At the same time, his boss communicated the results (and those of his wife) to a colleague in charge of carrying out organizational functions. Although it was not necessary to disclose data on his wife's results, it would be disproportionate to hold the complainant responsible for this fact, when it was the complainant himself who revealed the information in a voluntary, trusted environment amongst colleagues. It should also be noted that the complainant confirmed that he had carried out an access audit and confirmed that there had been no access to the complainant's data.
15/11/2022
Total number of pages: 75