Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The diffusion of a listing of candidates to pubillet/a of the town among the neighbors of the people, using the data of these that they appear in the Census, without the consent of the affected ones or of the parents/tutors legal and without legal habilitation, an illegitimate communication of data constitutes. Applied articles: Art. 3.h), 4.1 and 4.2 and 11, 44.3.c) and 44.3.k) LOPD, 16.3 LBRL

The access on the part of the town council to the mailbox of entry of the corporative electronic mail account of the denouncer, with the consequent access to the information of personal character that derives from it (visualization of the matter of private messages), an access or disloyal treatment is considered, since it does not have constancy that he had been informed about an absolute prohibition of personal use of the tool of work in a way previous to the worker or there is any warning of control. Applied articles: Art. 44.3.d) and 4.7 LOPD. 137.2 LRJPA and 5.1 D 278/1993

The lack of a contract of order between the Town Council and the dealer company of the service of management of the sport equipment in the town leads to concluding that, in these moments, the company is a responsible for the treatment of the data of the subscribers to the service. Even so, it is considered that the communication of these data, without consent, from the file of private titularity of the dealer company in the Town Council can find habilitation in the article 11.2.c) of the LOPD.

Claim estimation law of access. When the object of claim is the lack of answer, the accreditation of the presentation of the request of access before the responsible for the file and the lack of allegations of this in the procedure of protection entails the estimation of the claim, as well as the eventual extemporània answer. When in the background, the access of the claimant to the clinical history of its children under age proceeds, with the limitations indicated to the sectorial regulations. Applied articles: Art. 15 LOPD, 27.1 and 29.1 RLOPD, 15 and 18.4 Law 41/2002, 10.1, 12.4 and 13.2 Law 21/2000.

The to publish so much is stated that the town council has committed a cession of particulars illicit in the web of the local corporation, as in the block of the nursery of municipal titularity and the municipal magazine, photographs that contained images of the children under age of the accusing person. This publication would have been made without consent of the parents of these minors and without legal habilitation that protected it. Applied articles: Articles 44.3.k) and 11.1, both of the LOPD.

The sanctionative regime does not result from the LOPD of application to the denounced facts, since the diffusion on the part of the Town Council of the engraving made through a camera of videovigilància to third parties does not allow the identification of the persons who worked out engraved. Applied articles: Art. 3.a), 3.c) LOPD, and 5.t) RLOPD

Only the forces and the security corps d’acord with its specific regulations can carry out, the catchment d’imatges of persons on the public way through systems of videovigilància. The reinstallation of the system of videovigilància on the part of l’Ajuntament would only be viable and legitimate, from the prospect of the protection of data, if fulfillment at the beginning and guarantees of the regulations of data protection are given, and the procedure established for corresponding l’autorització is followed. With independence that the Board can assume certain costs of the system of videovigilància, from the prospect of the protection of data l’Ajuntament the responsible would be.

Could be accessed in historical documents of municipal l’arxiu that they refer to dead persons, and also to alive physical persons, in so far as it is overcome the deadline of thirty years of the production of the document (article 36.1 of Law 10/2001), and the documents do not contain data that affect the privacy d’aquestes persons, without the need for consent of the affected ones. Regarding the data contained in the rest of documents, it does not seem that the LRJPAC can serve as habilitadora rule, for which the consent would be necessary. It does not seem to the data of the fiscal censuses managed by l’Ajuntament, in the terms that the consultation formulates, that there is sufficient legal habilitation to access without consent. L’autorització d’accés to the particulars that can restrain themselves in the municipal Register Offices, the applicable regulations attended to, does not correspond to l’Ajuntament.

During the formality of entry register two offenses would have been committed: one, for breach of the principle of quality of the data since more particulars of the necessary ones would have been asked in order to formalize the register, and the second, because it would have been revealed to whom he presented the writing, particulars of third one. Applied articles: 4.1, 10, 44.3 c) and 44.3 d) LOPD

The person denounced for work harassment was in the report of reserved information initiated as a result of that complaint legitimated for accessing an acting report, a head has closed that reserved information. On the other hand, the instructor organ that processed another reserved information also was authorized to access that report.

Applied articles: Art. 6 LOPD, 37 LRJPAC, 24.1 CE