Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

From the perspective of data protection regulations, it is feasible to keep the information of the access register to the Department duly blocked, based on the general obligation to block Article 32 of the LOPDGDD once the active phase or semi-active has concluded (within a maximum period of one year set by the RAT). The Department should keep the information blocked until the maximum four-year period provided for in the TAAD is completed. Access to blocked public information must have a different response depending on which groups or individuals are affected (interest groups, individuals representing legal entities, individuals acting on their own behalf, etc.). in application of transparency legislation and data protection regulations. We refer to the IAI Report 83/2021 of this Authority.

The City Council may use the information available to homes in respect of which there is no water consumption or people registered in the last two years, as well as data from the IBI Register relating to the owners of these homes, with the purpose of applying the surcharge provided for in Article 72.4 of the TRLHL.

The request of the local company, to the banking entities, for the identification data of the persons who have made bank transfers for the payment of funeral rights of which the updated ownership is not stated may be covered by the legal basis. of Article 6.1.e) of the RGPD. With regard to the data relating to the telephone number and e-mail address of the person who made the payment, once their identity is known, it is considered compatible to use the contact details that the same entity has for the management. other funeral rights, as well as the possibility of contacting the person concerned using the data contained in the Municipal Register of Inhabitants or in the INE databases, so that it is the affected person who faciliti. Ultimately, and in a subsidiary manner with regard to the avenues just set out, the communication by banks of the contact details of the persons who have made the payments may be considered compatible if they are previously guarantees the right of the person concerned to oppose it.

It has been proven that the City Council did not take into account the right to delete the person here by claiming within the legally established time frame, and this because, despite its response of 19/04/2021, informing him that it had made anonymity of his data from the Municipal Act published, it is not until 22/02/2022, when the City Council was aware of the complaint procedure before that Authority, which proceeded to effectively address the right subject to the request for the deletion of data, which is why the present claim is estimated.

The processing of personal data by administrative personnel in order to schedule a medical visit, in the exercise of the tasks entrusted, and complying with the provisions of the data protection regulations, in accordance with the health regulations, is a legal treatment.

Due to an error in a buying and selling script of an immoble, which contained the CADAstral certification of the property of the person denouncing the property rather than that of the property actually transmitted, the Municipal Institute of Finance of the City Council of Barcelona introduced into the computer system of tax management a new owner of the property of the person denouncing the property and issued the IBI receipt of the property of the person denouncing in the name of the alleged new owner. This resulted in the IBI receipt not being sent to the payment of the person denouncing the account. After several complaints from the complainant, the City Council warned the cause of the incident and re-entered the correct data into the system. The following year, despite being aware of the error in the aforementioned buy-sales script, the City Council re-introduced to the computer system the flawed cadastral reference, which led to the same error as the previous year, that IBI receipts be issued to a person other than its actual owner.

One person reported that a squad flyer had sent messages via Twitter, stating that he knew that a city council had filed a disciplinary case for improper access to police databases (SIP), and blaming this city council for communicating this information to the fly. The complaint is filed for lack of proof of the reported facts, and for the fact that prior to sending the messages the controversial information had already been publicly disseminated, as it was thus stated as facts tested in a sanctioning resolution issued by the Authority in PS 47/20, preventing the commission of the facts from being attributed to the City Council, based on the principle of responsibility. In any case, since that sanctioning resolution was sanctioned by the City Council for having communicated this same information, it is considered that it would be disproportionate to sanction the City Council again for a new dissemination of the same information.

The present complaint is filed as the publication of the notes of applicants, identified with first names and surnames, would only violate the data protection regulations cited, if along with this data the full number of the DNI, NIE, passport or equivalent, which is not the case.

Right of access.

Right of access.