Enforcement · Hungarian National Authority for Data Protection and the Freedom of Information (NAIH) EN LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this document. Contains: this document’s text, its sections with their topics, and the full text of every law provision it applies. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Public area maintenance company: Non-compliance with general data processing principles

€4,290 Fine
Public area maintenance company
HUNGARY
Art. 5 GDPR Art. 6 GDPR Art. 13 GDPR
Monitoring Video Surveillance Audit Logs Employees Archiving IP Address Processing Security
Aug 2, 2019 Source

How it connects

Related across sources

Guidance Guidelines 3/2019 on processing of personal data through video devices EDPB Guidance Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3) EDPB Guidance Art. 29 WP Guidelines on GDPR transparency requirements (WP260 rev.01) EDPB Guidance Guidelines 05/2022 on the use of facial recognition technology in the area of law enforcement EDPB News De Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens publiceert een rapport over de risicoanalyse van de AVG (Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming). AEPD News Danish SA Declares Use of Google Analytics Unlawful Without Supplementary Measures Datatilsynet

Full text

An ex-employee complained that his employer unlawfully monitored his work by its CCTV. The employer argued that CCTV monitoring was necessary to assess, whether the employee fulfilled his employment related duties (i.e. monitoring certain public areas and signalling any unusual event to his colleagues) and that the monitoring also served the protection of its surveillance system from unlawful access or usage. NAIH found that monitoring of the employee by CCTV is not an appropriate way of assessing his work performance and the employer relied on an inappropriate legal basis (public interest, official authority) regarding the CCTV operations. The employer could have protected its public area surveillance system by other methods (e.g. by installing firewalls or other security upgrades to its systems). The employer also placed only a brief notice sheet at the entrance of the workstation of the employee regarding the CCTV monitoring, which NAIH deemed insufficient.

Industry: Employment

Original document at the source www.naih.hu

Similar Content