Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

Municipalities that do not have local police, or a body of vigilantes or have signed an agreement in application of article 12.1.fifth.c) of Law 10/1994, of 11 July, on the police of the Generalitat Mossos d 'Squadron, they can't install video surveillance cameras for the purpose of traffic control. Municipalities with a vigilante body may install video surveillance cameras for the purpose of controlling traffic limited to the functions assigned to vigilantes by their specific regulations. In the case of municipalities that have signed an agreement in application of article 12.1.c) of Law 10/1994, of 11 July, of the police of the Generalitat Mossos d'Esquadra of Catalonia, they can install video surveillance cameras for traffic control in the terms established by the said agreement. The installation and use of surveillance cameras for the control, regulation, surveillance and discipline of traffic, must comply with the provisions of the eighth additional provision of Organic Law 4/1997, of 4 August, for which regulates the use of video cameras by the Security Forces and Corps in public places, deployed in Catalonia by the second additional provision of Decree 134/1999, of 18 May, regulating video surveillance by the police of the Generalitat and the local police of Catalonia, as well as the RGPD and the LOPDGDD and Instruction 1/2009, especially the aspects analyzed in the legal basis VI of this opinion.

Security measures, which must be determined taking into account the risks arising from the loss or unauthorized access to data (among others), are they must apply effectively. In the present case, the security of the data was compromised when an employee of the accused entity left the cart containing the correspondence in the lobby of a certain building while attempting to practice notifications on the upper floors.

In the case at hand, it is appropriate for personal data protection regulations to give access to the entire file, provided that by virtue of the application of the principle of data minimization, identifying data are omitted from the access (DNI number or signature of the accused person), contact details or other personal data derived from the writs submitted by the accused person that are not relevant for the purposes of the control of the municipal action.

In the case analysed, the City Council would be obliged to communicate any information relevant to the purposes provided for in Article 22.2 LPD when there is a real danger to public safety or the investigation and prosecution of crimes by police forces. Although there is no explicit provision in the legislation studied on the obligation to formalise the request for information necessarily in writing, it is justified that the request for information from the police force be specified in writing, given the obligation incumbent on the City Council to comply with the principle of proactive responsibility. The communication of personal data without compliance with the principles of data protection may constitute an infringement of the aforementioned principles (Article 83.5 GDPR).

The actions taken by the City Council to investigate the facts that the complainant revealed are covered by compliance with a legal obligation. In generated email notifications, only authorized personnel must be accessed.

File resolution based on the right to the presumption of innocence, since there is no evidence to prove the reported facts, which in turn are denied by the city council (certification of the secretary) and by the person who, according to the person denouncing, stated that the city council had revealed to him the content of the heavy complaint against his company.

The principle|beginning of confidentiality is not harmed. The entity had a procedure normalized for the management|formality of the payrolls of its|his|her|their workers implemented. However, due to causes occurred and of quite biggest, this was seen obligatorily altered during the pike of the pandemic. With everything, it has not remained accredited|proved that the system adopted during this period entailed a significant risk of undue access to the contents of the payrolls of the workers.

The responsible for the treatment has to make an analysis of risks to determine the appropriate technical and organizational measures to guarantee the security|certainty of the data that are sent through electronic mail.

The claim is loved for formal reasons, since the center to whom the Department of Health entrusted|ordered the attention of the rights of informative self-determination, it|he|she answered once the deadline|installment of a month overcome. Without it being necessary to make a pronouncement about the background|bottom, the conformity of the person complaining with the given documentation attended to.