Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The data protection regulations do not prevent access by the claimant to the identity (name and surnames and numbers 4 to 7 of the DNI number) of the workers included in the list of voluntary mobility applications they have obtained a job under the mobility mechanism provided for in the regulations, identifying the date of the application and the place obtained. This is unless, in some cases, the communication of the information may reveal information protected by Article 23 LTC. The access of the claimant to the identity of the other persons who are registered in the mobility register and who have not obtained a new job under this mobility mechanism is not justified.

The data protection regulations do not prevent the complainant from accessing the requested report, including the merely identifying data of the education inspector signing it, the incoming and outgoing presidents of the AMPA and the principal, and Deputy Director of Territorial Services, as well as his own data. With regard to the data of the director of the institute, access to the assessments included in the report should be limited when they are a reproduction of the assessments of the reports of the Education Inspectorate in relation to the exercise of the Management Function.

The data protection regulations do not prevent the individualised information requested by the employee representative from being communicated to the employee, indicating the identity (name and surnames) of the workers affected by the agreement on the absorption of the productivity supplement and the amount this agreement has entailed for each worker.

In accordance with data protection regulations, the access of the aggrieved official to a copy of the recorded videos relating to the sessions, in which he participated, of the commission of inquiry into some facts allegedly constituting harassment at work and union persecution by its leader and a councilor of the City Council, would be justified in the need to be able to exercise their right to effective judicial protection.

The communication of particulars that the School made to an external company (Tokapp SL) without the consent of the parents of the affected pupil does not constitute the commission of an offense, since the controversial cession of data was made within the framework of a contract of person in charge|attendant of the treatment, where the School performed like in RT and the company how YOU. Article|Item 33 LOPDGDD he|she|it determines that the exchange of the necessary particulars for the provision|feature of the hired service, a communication of particulars is not considered.

The entity is admonished as responsible for a very severe offense for breach of the principle|beginning of confidentiality, for having sent 57 teachers an electronic mail without using the option of copy conceals, in what he|she|it asked them for the medical remission of the sick notes to resend them to MUFACE.

The complaint|denunciation is filed by lack of|due to lack of test|proof of the denounced facts, since only has ascertained that the documentation that the General Direction of Public Function remitted in the General Secretary's Office of the affected Department, and to the instructor persons of the reserved information, is protected by the applicable Protocol, and the communications of data derived from the deliveries|remittances of documentation made are protected for the foreseen juridical bases in the article|item 6.1.c) and e) of the RGPD.

The accusing person exposed that a neighbor, husband of a nurse who worked in the denounced entity, was a connoisseur of its|his|her|their data of health because its|his|her|their woman would have accessed its|his|her|their medical record. It|He|She based its|his|her|their suspicion on some words that they crossed as a result of a discussion|argument between the daughter of the accusing person and the husband of the mentioned nurse.
According to the denounced entity, the auditing of accesses for search of patient did not give the accusing person any register|record of access and no welfare activity carried out to the accusing person figured in its|his|her|their registers|records either. This last affirmation was answered|vouched for by l the same accusing person who he|she affirmed had never visited herself in the denounced Hospital. On the other hand, the expression that it would have made to its|his|her|their data of health to suspect an undue access, does not refer to any diagnosis or datum of health specifies.

The City Council could only capture images of individuals through video surveillance cameras on the islands of waste containers in the municipality in the event that the system is installed in delimited and enclosed spaces, other than public roads, on the basis of article 22 of the LOPDGDD and the competences of the municipality in matters of waste.

Data protection regulations would not prevent the union representative from accessing the list of Guardia Urbana personnel by identifying them with their professional identification number (TIP) and the place where they provide service.