Categories: Insights, Practice


2 Apr 2018

FAQs of the Data Protection Authority on the Data Protection Officer of Personal Data

The Data Protection Authority, on 26 March 2018, published on its official website a series of clarifications regarding the appointment and duties of the Data Protection Officer (“DPO”). In particular, the Authority listed all the persons obliged to appoint a DPO pursuant to Article 37 (1), b) and c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and underlined that “in any case in the light of the principle of accountability inspiring the Regulation it is recommended to appoint a DPO even in instances of non-compulsoriness.” Otherwise, the Authority simply reiterated the provisions of the Regulation: (i) a group of undertakings may appoint a single data protection officer; (ii) the data protection officer may be a staff member of the controller or processor, or fulfil the tasks on the basis of a service contract (in this case, a public body can be appointed as DPO); (iii) the data protection officer may fulfil other tasks and duties. The controller or processor shall ensure that any such tasks and duties do not result in a conflict of interests; (iv) characteristics and requirements of the data protection officer. The publication of this document is the continuation of the coordination and interpretation activity that the Authority is carrying out, and therefore it will come as no surprise the fact that from today until 25 May other “interpretative” documents may be published (e.g., guidelines, FAQs) relating to other provisions of the Regulation.

 

 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…