Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The claimant complained that the PGD had not responded to their requests for data deletion (4 in total) within the period of the legally provided month for this purpose. The complaint filed against the PGD is estimated, since it did not respond in time to its 4 requests, no pronouncement is made regarding the substance of the claim, since the PGD resolved to estimate the requests for deletion submitted by the claimant.

The claim for disregard of the right to delete data contained in shared folders in the workplace, to which the claimant now has no access, and which include personal emails, is estimated.

The claimant asked for the deletion of the data that appeared in the file of the scope of the information systems of the PGD (SIP PF) in relation to police proceedings that led to a short procedure processed by a criminal court. The claim is estimated, since it was based on the lack of response to the request for deletion, but the PGD is required to respond to the request for deletion made by the claimant, even if it is in the negative sense of its request.

The claimant requested the deletion of their data from the City Council's electronic headquarters, since it had already far exceeded the purpose for which they were initially authorized, collected and processed, and for this purpose requested the withdrawal of their data from any physical or digital support for which the entity was responsible. The claim of tutelage formulated by the claimant against the City Council is estimated, without making any other pronouncement or any requirement regarding the fund since the right of the claimant has been made effective.

The claim is rejected since, in this case, the main requirement is lacking in order to be able to require the data controller to carry out the deletion of personal data, since the person who requested this deletion did not appear as the owner of the personal data to be deleted. In this sense, B:SM has accredited that it has been at all times proactive, because it required the applicant to prove his identity, and has given a response adjusted to the circumstances of the case.

The claim is estimated, given that the General Directorate of the Police of the Department of the Interior did not respond in time to the request of the person making the claim, without it being necessary to make a statement on the merits, given that the DGP has estimated the deletion request.

The claim is estimated, given that the General Directorate of the Police of the Department of the Interior did not respond in time to the request of the person making the claim, without it being necessary to make a statement on the merits, given that the DGP has estimated the deletion request.

The claim is partially estimated, given that the Directorate General of the Police of the Department of Interior did not respond in time to the request of the claimant, and as regards the substance of the claim, it is declared that the resolution of the PGD, estimatory of the request for deletion, is in accordance with law.

The claim should be dismissed, given that the claimed entity acted in accordance with law, dismissing the request for deletion formulated by the person here claiming, gave it a specific response and adjusted to that provided by the health legislation, taking into account the legal terms of conservation, and the importance of preserving its relevant health data to guarantee the person claiming adequate health care from any health center.

The claim is partially estimated, since the PGD did not respond in time to the request of the claimant. It is not appropriate to require any action regarding the fund, insofar as the PGD gave a right-to-right response to the request, albeit extemporaneously.