Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Violating Articles 5(1)(c) and 13 GDPR in relation to a video surveillance system in an apartment building. [58] 2021-04-15 Vodafone Espana, S.A.U. €150,000 (reduced to €90,000) Spain Violation of Article 6(1)(a) GDPR by processing personal data without consent or any other legal basis. When imposing the fine, the AEPD took into account:
The GDPR 2016 has eleven chapters, concerning general provisions, principles, rights of the data subject, duties of data controllers or processors, transfers of personal data to third countries, supervisory authorities, cooperation among member states, remedies, liability or penalties for breach of rights, and miscellaneous final provisions.
In 1995, the EU passed the Data Protection Directive (DPD), which has recently been replaced with the 2016 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a comprehensive federal data breach notification law. The GDPR offers stronger data protection laws, broader data breach notification laws, and new factors such as the right to data portability.
In Australia, punitive damages are not available for breach of contract, [5] but are possible for tort cases.. The law is less settled regarding equitable wrongs. In Harris v Digital Pulse Pty Ltd, [6] the defendant employees knowingly breached contractual and fiduciary duties to their employer by diverting business to themselves and misusing its confidential information.
Caparo v. Dickman: 3 Tests for duty of care is whether the damage was reasonably foreseeable, whether there was a relationship of proximity between claimant and defendant; and whether it is just and reasonable to impose a duty. House of Lords case. McDonald's coffee case: An American court case that became a cause célèbre for advocates of ...
Penal damages are liquidated damages which exceed reasonable compensatory damages, making them invalid under common law.While liquidated damage clauses set a pre-agreed value on the expected loss to one party if the other party were to breach the contract, penal damages go further and seek to penalise the breaching party beyond the reasonable losses from the breach. [1]
The overall object of tort law is to define cases in which the law may justly hold one party liable to compensate another. Are these such cases? A and B owed C a duty to protect C against a risk of a particular and very serious kind. They failed to perform that duty.
Cases such as Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc. and Mink v. AAAA Development L.L.C. followed the approach defined by Zippo. However, more recent cases appear to be departing from the Zippo test and relying upon more traditional approaches to personal jurisdiction. [11] For example, the courts in Blakey v. Continental Airlines, Dudnikov v.