目录
GDPR > 第 64 條. 委員會之意見
下载PDF

第 64 條 GDPR. 委員會之意見

Article 64 GDPR. Opinion of the Board

1. 當主管監管機關欲採取下列任一措施時,委員會應發布其意見。 為此,當有下列任一情形時,主管監管機關應向委員會通知該裁決草 案:

1. The Board shall issue an opinion where a competent supervisory authority intends to adopt any of the measures below. To that end, the competent supervisory authority shall communicate the draft decision to the Board, when it:

(a) 旨在採取依第35條第4項規定進行資料保護影響評估之處理活動 清單;

(a) aims to adopt a list of the processing operations subject to the requirement for a data protection impact assessment pursuant to Article 35(4);

连接数

(b) 涉及依第 40 條第 7 項之事項,即行為守則草案或行為守則之修 訂或擴充是否符合本規則;

(b) concerns a matter pursuant to Article 40(7) whether a draft code of conduct or an amendment or extension to a code of conduct complies with this Regulation;

连接数

(c) 旨在核准第 41 條第 3 項之機構認證標準或第 43 條第 3 項之認證 機構;

(c) aims to approve the requirements for accreditation of a body pursuant to Article 41(3), of a certification body pursuant to Article 43(3) or the criteria for certification referred to in Article 42(5);

连接数

(d) 旨在決定第 46 條第 2 項第 d 點及第 28 條第 8 項所述之標準資料 保護條款;

(d) aims to determine standard data protection clauses referred to in point (d) of Article 46(2) and in Article 28(8);

连接数

(e) 旨在授權第 46 條第 3 項第 a 點所述之契約條款;或

(e) aims to authorise contractual clauses referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); or

连接数

(f) 旨在核准第 47 條定義下有拘束力之企業守則。

(f) aims to approve binding corporate rules within the meaning of Article 47.

连接数

2. 任何監管機關、委員會主席或執委會主席為獲得意見得要求委員 會審查任何在一個以上之會員國具有一般適用性或產生效力之事項, 特別是當主管監管機關不遵守第 61 條互助之義務,或第 62 條聯合作 業之義務時。

2. Any supervisory authority, the Chair of the Board or the Commission may request that any matter of general application or producing effects in more than one Member State be examined by the Board with a view to obtaining an opinion, in particular where a competent supervisory authority does not comply with the obligations for mutual assistance in accordance with Article 61 or for joint operations in accordance with Article 62.

连接数

3. 在第 1 項及第 2 項所規定之情形,若委員會尚未對同一事項發表 過意見,應就提交予其之事項發布意見。該意見應於八週內以委員會 成員過半數多數決之方式通過之。考量標的之複雜性,該期限得延長 六週。關於依第 5 項向委員會成員分發之第 1 項所述之裁決草案,未 在主席所指定之合理期間內表示異議之成員應被視為同意該裁決草 案。

3. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Board shall issue an opinion on the matter submitted to it provided that it has not already issued an opinion on the same matter. That opinion shall be adopted within eight weeks by simple majority of the members of the Board. That period may be extended by a further six weeks, taking into account the complexity of the subject matter. Regarding the draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 circulated to the members of the Board in accordance with paragraph 5, a member which has not objected within a reasonable period indicated by the Chair, shall be deemed to be in agreement with the draft decision.

4. 監管機關及執委會應以電子方式使用標準化格式傳送任何相關資 訊,依其情形包括事實摘要、裁決草案、使訂定該等措施為必要之理 由,以及其他相關監管機關之觀點,不得無故遲延。

4. Supervisory authorities and the Commission shall, without undue delay, communicate by electronic means to the Board, using a standardised format any relevant information, including as the case may be a summary of the facts, the draft decision, the grounds which make the enactment of such measure necessary, and the views of other supervisory authorities concerned.

5. 委員會之主席應以電子方式通知,不得無故遲延:

5. The Chair of the Board shall, without undue, delay inform by electronic means:

(a) 曾依標準化格式向其傳送之任何相關資訊之委員會及執委會之成 員。必要時,委員會之秘書應提供相關資訊之翻譯;以及

(a) the members of the Board and the Commission of any relevant information which has been communicated to it using a standardised format. The secretariat of the Board shall, where necessary, provide translations of relevant information; and

(b) 第 1 項及第 2 項所述之監管機關(視情況而定)及執委會之意見, 並使其公開。

(b) the supervisory authority referred to, as the case may be, in paragraphs 1 and 2, and the Commission of the opinion and make it public.

6. 主管監管機關不得在第 3 項所述期間通過其依第 1 項所述之裁決 草案。

6. The competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall not adopt its draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 within the period referred to in paragraph 3.

7. 第 1 項所述之監管機關應充分考量委員會之意見,並應在收到意 見後兩週內,透過電子方式使用標準化格式向委員會主席通知是否維 持或修訂其裁決草案,以及有修訂時,修訂之裁決草案。

7. The competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall take utmost account of the opinion of the Board and shall, within two weeks after receiving the opinion, communicate to the Chair of the Board by electronic means whether it will maintain or amend its draft decision and, if any, the amended draft decision, using a standardised format.

8. 若相關監管機關在第 7 項所述之期限內通知委員會之主席其不欲 遵循全部或部分委員會之意見,若有正當理由,應有第 65 條第 1 項 之適用。

8. Where the competent supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 informs the Chair of the Board within the period referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article that it does not intend to follow the opinion of the Board, in whole or in part, providing the relevant grounds, Article 65(1) shall apply.

连接数
前言 发表评论
前言

(136) 當適用一致性機制時,若委員會之多數成員皆如此決定,或任 何相關監管機關或執委會如此要求者,該委員會應於一定時間內公告 其意見。當監管機關間有爭執時,委員會亦應有權通過有法拘束力之 裁決。為達該目的,原則上經其成員三分之二以上之多數決同意,其 即應對監管機關間存有意見衝突之清楚特定案件,發布具法拘束力之 裁決,尤其是在領導監管機關與相關監管機關間在協作機制下就個案 所持見解,特別是就是否違反本規則之見解發生衝突時。

(136) In applying the consistency mechanism, the Board should, within a determined period of time, issue an opinion, if a majority of its members so decides or if so requested by any supervisory authority concerned or the Commission. The Board should also be empowered to adopt legally binding decisions where there are disputes between supervisory authorities. For that purpose, it should issue, in principle by a two-thirds majority of its members, legally binding decisions in clearly specified cases where there are conflicting views among supervisory authorities, in particular in the cooperation mechanism between the lead supervisory authority and supervisory authorities concerned on the merits of the case, in particular whether there is an infringement of this Regulation.

发表评论