Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The publication in the account of facebook of a town councilor of PSC to (...), of photos of minors and old people, about activities developed when he was a member of the team of municipal government with competences in the Area of social services, a severe offense is, to communicate particulars without consent of the affected ones nor legal habilitation. Applied articles: Art. 3.h), 11, 44.3.k) LOPD, 13.1 RLOPD

The mayor revealed in a Plenum the illness that the ex-secretary of the Town Council had suffered and that had motivated its work casualty, and the duration of this. This information would have retired in the minutes that were hanged to the municipal web, and the mayor would have revealed the same information later during a press conference, to defend itself of some facts denounced by CiU and which the mayor attributed to a revenge of the ex-secretary. Applied articles: LOPD: 1, 2, 3, 7, 11, 44.4b and DL 2/2003: 98, 156, 164

Entrusting the provision of determinate services that imply the access to particulars without having formalized a contract in the foreseen terms to the art. 12 LOPD, it is constitutive of a slight offense. In turn, to allow the commission of administrative offenses to the person in charge of the treatment that are not necessary for the execution of the provision the access to relative data, it is an illicit treatment of data especially protected, which constitutes a very severe offense. Applied articles: 3, 9, 12, 44.2.d and 44.4.b LOPD; 5, 20, 91 and 92 RLOPD.

The Local Police of the Town Council published in a board, accessible to all the police staff, a resolution of the Head of the Local Police that contained data of health related to the person accusing, what supposes an illicit treatment of data especially protected, and therefore a very severe offense. Applied articles: 7.3 and 44.4.b) LOPD

The claim of opposition is loved for formal reasons as well as in the background, even though the Town Council is not required that the law of opposition makes cash exercised, since the claimant does not invoke founded and legitimate motives for the elimination of publication of its data and with the applicable entry of Law 19/2014, at present he orders of legal habilitation for the publication of the data the complaining person. Applied articles: 6.4 and 16 LOPD, 35 RLOPD and 13 Law 19/2014

The claim is loved since the Department of Education did not answer the request of opposition in deadline, in spite of having proceeded to the elimination of the object data of controversy. Applied articles: Art. 6.4 and 18 LOPD and Art. 34 and 35 RLOPD

Loves itself the claim for having given answer beyond dels10 days in the request of opposition, without it proceeding to require the Town Council because it depublished already the controversial documents. Applied articles: 6.4 LOPD and 35 RLOPD

The claim of opposition is loved for having answered the request beyond the 10 foreseen days to the effect, without it proceeding to require the Town Council since it has already dispublished the controversial documents. Applied articles: Art. 35 RLOPD

The claim of opposition is loved for having answered the request beyond the 10 foreseen days to the effect, without it proceeding to require the Town Council since it has already dispublished the controversial documents. Applied articles: Art. 35 RLOPD

The claim of opposition is loved for having answered the request beyond the 10 foreseen days to the effect, without it proceeding to require the Town Council since it has already dispublished the controversial documents. Applied articles: Art. 35 RLOPD