← back to the act's dossier

GDPR — Article 83

The article's text

Article 83 General conditions for imposing administrative fines 1. Each supervisory authority shall ensure that the imposition of administrative fines pursuant to this Article in respect of infringements of this Regulation referred to in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 shall in each individual case be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. 2. Administrative fines shall, depending on the circumstances of each individual case, be imposed in addition to, or instead of, measures referred to in points (a) to (h) and (j) of Article 58(2). case, be imposed in addition to, or instead of, measures referred to in points (a) to (h) and (j) of Article 58(2). When deciding whether to impose an administrative fine and deciding on the amount of the administrative fine in each individual case due regard shall be given to the following: (a) the nature, gravity and duration of the infringement taking into account the nature scope or purpose of the processing concerned as well as the number of data subjects affected and the level of damage suffered by them; (b) the intentional or negligent character of the infringement; (c) any action taken by the controller or processor to mitigate the damage suffered by
full text
data subjects; (d) the degree of responsibility of the controller or processor taking into account technical and organisational measures implemented by them pursuant to Articles 25 and 32; (e) any relevant previous infringements by the controller or processor; (f) the degree of cooperation with the supervisory authority, in order to remedy the infringement and mitigate the possible adverse effects of the infringement; (g) the categories of personal data affected by the infringement; (h) the manner in which the infringement became known to the supervisory authority, in particular whether, and if so to what extent, the controller or processor notified the infringement; (i) where measures referred to in Article 58(2) have previously been ordered against the controller or processor concerned with regard to the same subject-matter, compliance with those measures; (j) adherence to approved codes of conduct pursuant to Article 40 or approved certification mechanisms pursuant to Article 42; and (k) any other aggravating or mitigating factor applicable to the circumstances of the case, such as financial benefits gained, or losses avoided, directly or indirectly, from the infringement. of the case, such as financial benefits gained, or losses avoided, directly or indirectly, from the infringement. 3. If a controller or processor intentionally or negligently, for the same or linked processing operations, infringes several provisions of this Regulation, the total amount of the administrative fine shall not exceed the amount specified for the gravest infringement. the total amount of the administrative fine shall not exceed the amount specified for the gravest infringement. 4. Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 10 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 2 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher: (a) the obligations of the controller and the processor pursuant to Articles 8, 11, 25 to 39 and 42 and 43; (b) the obligations of the certification body pursuant to Articles 42 and 43; (c) the obligations of the monitoring body pursuant to Article 41(4). body pursuant to Articles 42 and 43; (c) the obligations of the monitoring body pursuant to Article 41(4). 5. Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 20 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher: (a) the basic principles for processing, including conditions for consent, pursuant to Articles 5, 6, 7 and 9; (b) the data subjects' rights pursuant to Articles 12 to 22; (c) the transfers of personal data to a recipient in a third country or an international organisation pursuant to Articles 44 to 49; (d) any obligations pursuant to Member State law adopted under Chapter IX; (e) non-compliance with an order or a temporary or definitive limitation on processing or the suspension of data flows by the supervisory authority pursuant to Article 58(2) or failure to provide access in violation of Article 58(1). by the supervisory authority pursuant to Article 58(2) or failure to provide access in violation of Article 58(1). 6. Non-compliance with an order by the supervisory authority as referred to in Article 58(2) shall, in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article, be subject to administrative fines up to 20 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. 7. Without prejudice to the corrective powers of supervisory authorities pursuant to Article 58(2), each Member State may lay down the rules on whether and to what extent administrative fines may be imposed on public authorities and bodies established in that Member State. to what extent administrative fines may be imposed on public authorities and bodies established in that Member State. 8. The exercise by the supervisory authority of its powers under this Article shall be subject to appropriate procedural safeguards in accordance with Union and Member State law, including effective judicial remedy and due process. safeguards in accordance with Union and Member State law, including effective judicial remedy and due process. 9. Where the legal system of the Member State does not provide for administrative fines, this Article may be applied in such a manner that the fine is initiated by the competent supervisory authority and imposed by competent national courts, while ensuring that those legal remedies are effective and have an equivalent effect to the administrative fines imposed by supervisory authorities. In any event, the fines imposed shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Those Member States shall notify to the Commission the provisions of their laws which they adopt pursuant to this paragraph by 25 May 2018 and, without delay, any subsequent amendment law or amendment affecting them.

Who wrote about this article in the consultations

Filers who named this exact article number in their own text. It is their sentence, not our reading — and not a causal claim.

9
business association
5
NGO
3
company
1
non-EU citizen
1
consumer organisation
WhoCountryWhat they wrote
Van Bael & BellisBE15 Article 83(2)(k) GDPR makes it possible for a DPA to consider “any other … mitigating factor” in imposing fines. 16 Paul Breitbarth (2021) “A Risk-Based Approach to International Data Transfers”, European Data Protection Law Review, 7(4), 539-549. https://d ↗
Deutscher Juristinnenbund e.V.DEVerstöße gegen die Prinzipien "Privacy by Design" und "Privacy by Default" sollten auch Verstöße gegen „Equality by Design“ gemäß Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit a) DSGVO bußgeldbewährt sein. ↗
ANITEC-ASSINFORMITaims in which only lawyers charging fees are the winners. Guidance and clarity within the GDPR framework would be most welcome 6. Article 83 GDPR – Unclear framework with respect to the calculation of fines: In May 2023, the EDPB adopted new Guidelines on the ↗
Confederation of Swedish EnterpriseSEto their processing of personal data might travel through the courts. A time-bar provision would be justified. Consider revising Art. 83 GDPR and issue clear guidance on how to calculate fines. The framework for calculation of administrative fines is unclear. ↗
Gesellschaft für Datenschutz und Datensicherheit (GDD) e.V.DEund Benachrich- tigungspflicht verstößt, die ihrerseits gem. Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a) DS-GVO sanktioniert werden kann. 5. Meldung von Datenpannen Die Meldung einer Verletzung des Schutzes personenbezogener Daten muss nach Art. 33 Abs. 1 S. 1 DS-GVO innerhalb von ↗
United InternetDEthorities of the federal and state governments also interpret the GDPR differently in parts. Enforcement Against US Corporations (Art. 83 GDPR): In individual cases, such as the fines imposed by the Irish supervisory authority against Meta in 2023, high fines ↗
Hans-Hermann SchildDEt in derselben verfahrensrechtlichen Situation befinden sol- len.20 Dies ist zwar bei Verfahren zur Verhängung von Geldbußen nach Art. 83 DSGVO zu Recht der Fall, bei dem Begehren auf ein Einschreiten der Aufsichtsbehörde nach Art. 58 Abs. ↗
Polish Confederation LewiatanPLn accordance with the Charter” (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is the exercise by the SAs of their power to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
Asociación Española de Economía Digital (Adigital)ESn accordance with the Charter” (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is the exercise by the SAs of their power to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
American Chamber of Commerce in PolandPLn accordance with the Charter” (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is the exercise by the SAs of their power to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
Ecommerce EuropeBEordance with the Charter” (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is also the exercise by the SAs of their power to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
American Chamber of Commerce to the EU (AmCham EU)BEand Member State law in accordance with the Charter’ (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is the SAs’ ability to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
noybATnce with Article 58(2) GDPR or applicable national law; (g) the number and the overall amount of fines issued and collected under Article 83 and 84 GDPR or relevant national law; and (h) the annual budget and the number of staff, itemized by training, tasks an ↗
AmCham SlovenijaSIn accordance with the Charter” (Article 58(4) GDPR), as is the exercise by the SAs of their power to impose administrative fines (Article 83(8) GDPR). ↗
David ErdosGBs are far from the only enforcement tool for DPAs within the GDPR they are accorded a central position (see GDPR, recital 148 and art. 83) and so a significant change of emphasis rather than a continuation of the status quo should be expected and effected. In ↗
Pinsent MasonsIEiple. Such an interpretation would always equate to a higher level administrative fine, and not the lower tier fine as set out in Article 83(4)(a). We propose more detailed guidance at EU-level on how fines should be calculated and, on the use of other the cor ↗
European Society for Medical OncologyCHhall be permitted only with the consent of the data subject, and shall be subject to the conditions and safeguards referred to in Article 83. 2a. Member States law may provide for exceptions to the require- ment of consent for research, as referred to in parag ↗
NLdigitalNLthe GDPR nor the interpretation of the ECJ (nor the Article 29 Working Party opinion on legitimate interest of 2014). Fine (article 83 lid 2 Avg) More harmonization is needed regarding the imposition of fines, such as a) the calculation of fines (revenue linke ↗
Federation of German Consumer Associations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V. - vzbv)DEe information each controller provides. It also ensures that all joint controllers within 20 See section 2.1.6. 19 the meaning of Art. 83 (5) (b) GDPR are liable for compliance with this requirement. They are liable to sanctions if incomplete information is pr ↗
Centre for Information Policy Leadership (CIPL)GBArticle 83 GDPR; and  Promote reiterative compliance and amicable settlement practices between organisations and DPAs. 3. Open Questions Regarding the Interpretation of GDPR’s Key Substantive Requirements 3.1 Legal Bases for Processing There is a perception t ↗
Zentralverband der deutschen Werbewirtschaft ZAWDEVerfahren unterschiedlicher Stellen wegen desselben Sachverhalts gegen den Verantwortlichen verhindert. Schließlich sollte der in Artikel 83 DSGVO festgelegte Bußgeldrahmen im Lichte des Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatzes überprüft, jedenfalls aber auf eine einhe ↗

Source: public consultation submissions and position papers. n = 21 mentions; counted as a literal reference to the article number.

Ask about this article →