Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The educational centers are legitimated to be able to treat the particulars of its pupils that are necessary for the exercise of the functions educational and guiding that they have attributed, without the need for having its consent or that of its legal representative. Likewise, among other analyzed suppositions, determinate data can communicate to the police of proximity, without consent, to contrast the information that one has about a determinate pupil, in so far as this cession founds in the protection of the interest of the minor and is set in the educational function that the center has attributed for the HIM 2/2006, of 3 May, of Education.

The publication made by the University of the results of the evaluation of the university teachers made by the pupils, is fitted out by the additional Disposal 21st, point 4, of the organic Law 4/2007, of 12 April. In spite of the legal habilitation to publish them, during the necessary time to attain the purpose of the publication, in the board of advertisements of the university, as well as in the intranet or in internet, from the point of view upward to the protection of data, the publication is recommended to the board of advertisements and/or the intranet. In case the publication is opted for in internet it is recommended to implement technical measures to limit the action of the tools of internet research.

The regulations regulatory of the fundamental right to the protection of personal character data do not result from application when there is not data processing of character personal, and precisely regarding the videovigilància, when the cameras do not treat images not even voices. Applied articles: 1 LOPD; 1 Instruction 1/2009.

The engraving of images and sounds on the public way made by the Forces and Security Corps, once the preceptive authorization has been obtained, is legitimate. In turn, the treatment through the cameras subjected to the police regime does not require the creation or the inscription of a file. Applied articles: 2 LOPD; 1 and 9 HIM 4/1997; 11 Decree 134/1999; 4, 9 and 12 Instruction 1/2009.

It does not constitute a breach of the LOPD when an active behavior of third one, tendent to making disappear or reduce the safety measures reasonably implemented by the responsible for the file or the treatment, coincides. Applied articles: 9 LOPD; 91 and 107 RLOPD.

The performances are filed since: a) The delivery of the clinical history in a judicial organ, when it has been required by this, does not constitute an illicit cession of particulars given the existence of a legal habilitation; and b) The treatment of determinate data related to relatives of the patient to the clinical history of this it would be protected by the sanitary regulations. Applied articles: 3.i) and 7.3 LOPD; 118 CE; 17 Law 6/1985; 332 Law 1/2000; 3, 15, 18 Law 41/2002; 10, 11, 13 Law 21/2000

The claim of protection estimates upward of cancellation for reasons of form, since the responsible for file did not answer the request formulated by the affected person and is rejected for reasons of background, reached that there is a duty of conservation in relation to the data the cancellation of which was requested. Applied articles: 16.5 LOPD and 33 RLOPD