ExamGecko
Question list
Search
Search

List of questions

Search

Related questions


SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: ProStorage is a multinational cloud storage provider headquartered in the Netherlands. Its CEO. Ruth Brown, has developed a two-pronged strategy for growth: 1) expand ProStorage s global customer base and 2) increase ProStorage's sales force by efficiently onboarding effective teams. Enacting this strategy has recently been complicated by Ruth's health condition, which has limited her working hours, as well as her ability to travel to meet potential customers. ProStorage's Human Resources department and Ruth's Chief of Staff now work together to manage her schedule and ensure that she is able to make all her medical appointments The latter has become especially crucial after Ruth's last trip to India, where she suffered a medical emergency and was hospitalized m New Delhi Unable to reach Ruths family, the hospital reached out to ProStorage and was able to connect with her Chief of Staff, who in coordination with Mary, the head of HR. provided information to the doctors based on accommodate on requests Ruth made when she started a: ProStorage In support of Ruth's strategic goals of hiring more sales representatives, the Human Resources team is focused on improving its processes to ensure that new employees are sourced, interviewed, hired, and onboarded efficiently. To help with this, Mary identified two vendors, HRYourWay, a German based company, and InstaHR, an Australian based company. She decided to have both vendors go through ProStorage's vendor risk review process so she can work with Ruth to make the final decision. As part of the review process, Jackie, who is responsible for maintaining ProStorage's privacy program (including maintaining controller BCRs and conducting vendor risk assessments), reviewed both vendors but completed a transfer impact assessment only for InstaHR. After her review of both boasted a more established privacy program and provided third-party attestations, whereas HRYourWay was a small vendor with minimal data protection operations. Thus, she recommended InstaHR. ProStorage's marketing team also worked to meet the strategic goals of the company by focusing on industries where it needed to grow its market share. To help with this, the team selected as a partner UpFinance, a US based company with deep connections to financial industry customers. During ProStorage's diligence process, Jackie from the privacy team noted in the transfer impact assessment that UpFinance implements several data protection measures including end-to-end encryption, with encryption keys held by the customer. Notably, UpFinance has not received any government requests in its 7 years of business. Still, Jackie recommended that the contract require UpFinance to notify ProStorage if it receives a government request for personal data UpFinance processes on its behalf prior to disclosing such data. What transfer mechanism did ProStorage most likely rely on to transfer Ruth's medical information to the hospital?








SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: Brady is a computer programmer based in New Zealand who has been running his own business for two years. Brady's business provides a low-cost suite of services to customers throughout the European Economic Area (EEA). The services are targeted towards new and aspiring small business owners. Brady's company, called Brady Box, provides web page design services, a Social Networking Service (SNS) and consulting services that help people manage their own online stores. Unfortunately, Brady has been receiving some complaints. A customer named Anna recently uploaded her plans for a new product onto Brady Box's chat area, which is open to public viewing. Although she realized her mistake two weeks later and removed the document, Anna is holding Brady Box responsible for not noticing the error through regular monitoring of the website. Brady believes he should not be held liable. Another customer, Felipe, was alarmed to discover that his personal information was transferred to a third- party contractor called Hermes Designs and worries that sensitive information regarding his business plans may be misused. Brady does not believe he violated European privacy rules. He provides a privacy notice to all of his customers explicitly stating that personal data may be transferred to specific third parties in fulfillment of a requested service. Felipe says he read the privacy notice but that it was long and complicated Brady continues to insist that Felipe has no need to be concerned, as he can personally vouch for the integrity of Hermes Designs. In fact, Hermes Designs has taken the initiative to create sample customized banner advertisements for customers like Felipe. Brady is happy to provide a link to the example banner ads, now posted on the Hermes Designs webpage. Hermes Designs plans on following up with direct marketing to these customers. Brady was surprised when another customer, Serge, expressed his dismay that a quotation by him is being used within a graphic collage on Brady Box's home webpage. The quotation is attributed to Serge by first and last name. Brady, however, was not worried about any sort of litigation. He wrote back to Serge to let him know that he found the quotation within Brady Box's Social Networking Service (SNS), as Serge himself had posted the quotation. In his response, Brady did offer to remove the quotation as a courtesy. Despite some customer complaints, Brady's business is flourishing. He even supplements his income through online behavioral advertising (OBA) via a third-party ad network with whom he has set clearly defined roles. Brady is pleased that, although some customers are not explicitly aware of the OBA, the advertisements contain useful products and services. Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), what is the most likely reason Serge may have grounds to object to the use of his quotation?

Question 83 - CIPP-E discussion

Report
Export

SCENARIO

Please use the following to answer the next question:

Javier is a member of the fitness club EVERFIT. This company has branches in many EU member states, but for the purposes of the GDPR maintains its primary establishment in France. Javier lives in Newry, Northern Ireland (part of the U.K.), and commutes across the border to work in Dundalk, Ireland. Two years ago while on a business trip, Javier was photographed while working out at a branch of EVERFIT in Frankfurt, Germany. At the time, Javier gave his consent to being included in the photograph, since he was told that it would be used for promotional purposes only. Since then, the photograph has been used in the club's U.K. brochures, and it features in the landing page of its U.K. website. However, the fitness club has recently fallen into disrepute due to widespread mistreatment of members at various branches of the club in several EU member states. As a result, Javier no longer feels comfortable with his photograph being publicly associated with the fitness club.

After numerous failed attempts to book an appointment with the manager of the local branch to discuss this matter, Javier sends a letter to EVETFIT requesting that his image be removed from the website and all promotional materials. Months pass and Javier, having received no acknowledgment of his request, becomes very anxious about this matter. After repeatedly failing to contact EVETFIT through alternate channels, he decides to take action against the company.

Javier contacts the U.K. Information Commissioner's Office ('ICO' -- the U.K.'s supervisory authority) to lodge a complaint about this matter. The ICO, pursuant to Article 56 (3) of the GDPR, informs the CNIL (i.e. the supervisory authority of EVERFIT's main establishment) about this matter. Despite the fact that EVERFIT has an establishment in the U.K., the CNIL decides to handle the case in accordance with Article 60 of the GDPR. The CNIL liaises with the ICO, as relevant under the cooperation procedure. In light of issues amongst the supervisory authorities to reach a decision, the European Data Protection Board becomes involved and, pursuant to the consistency mechanism, issues a binding decision.

Additionally, Javier sues EVERFIT for the damages caused as a result of its failure to honor his request to have his photograph removed from the brochure and website.

Under the cooperation mechanism, what should the lead authority (the CNIL) do after it has formed its view on the matter?

A.

Submit a draft decision to other supervisory authorities for their opinion.

Answers
A.

Submit a draft decision to other supervisory authorities for their opinion.

B.

Request that the other supervisory authorities provide the lead authority with a draft decision for its consideration.

Answers
B.

Request that the other supervisory authorities provide the lead authority with a draft decision for its consideration.

C.

Submit a draft decision directly to the Commission to ensure the effectiveness of the consistency mechanism.

Answers
C.

Submit a draft decision directly to the Commission to ensure the effectiveness of the consistency mechanism.

D.

Request that members of the seconding supervisory authority and the host supervisory authority co-draft a decision.

Answers
D.

Request that members of the seconding supervisory authority and the host supervisory authority co-draft a decision.

Suggested answer: A

Explanation:

:According to Article 60 of the GDPR, the lead authority (the CNIL in this case) shall cooperate with the other concerned supervisory authorities (the ICO and any other authority where EVERFIT has an establishment or where data subjects are affected) to reach a consensus on the case. The lead authority shall submit a draft decision to the other authorities for their opinion and take due account of their views. If the other authorities agree with the draft decision, the lead authority shall adopt and notify it to the controller (EVERFIT) and the complainant (Javier). If the other authorities object to the draft decision, they shall express their objections within a specified period and try to reach a consensus with the lead authority. If no consensus is reached, the matter shall be referred to the EDPB for a binding decision under the consistency mechanism (Article 65 of the GDPR).Reference:GDPR Cooperation and Enforcement,First overview on the implementation of the GDPR and the roles and means of the national supervisory authorities,Data protection: Commission adopts new rules to ensure stronger cooperation and enforcement,Article 65 FAQ

asked 22/11/2024
krishamrock krishqmrock
34 questions
User
Your answer:
0 comments
Sorted by

Leave a comment first