Valid CIPP-E Dumps shared by ExamDiscuss.com for Helping Passing CIPP-E Exam! ExamDiscuss.com now offer the newest CIPP-E exam dumps, the ExamDiscuss.com CIPP-E exam questions have been updated and answers have been corrected get the newest ExamDiscuss.com CIPP-E dumps with Test Engine here:
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?
Correct Answer: B
According to Article 49 of the GDPR, transfers of personal data to third countries or international organisations may take place in the absence of an adequacy decision or appropriate safeguards, such as standard contractual clauses or binding corporate rules, only if one of the derogations listed in that article applies1. One of the derogations is when the transfer is necessary for the protection of the vital interests of the data subject or of other persons, where the data subject is physically or legally incapable of giving consent1. This derogation is intended to cover only urgent situations, such as medical emergencies, where the transfer is essential for the data subject's life or health2. In this scenario, ProStorage most likely relied on this derogation to transfer Ruth's medical information to the hospital in India, where she suffered a medical emergency and was hospitalized. The transfer was necessary for the protection of Ruth's vital interests, as she was in a critical condition and needed urgent medical care. Ruth was also physically or legally incapable of giving consent, as she was unconscious or incapacitated. Therefore, option B is the correct answer. Option A is incorrect because Ruth's implied consent is not a valid transfer mechanism under the GDPR. Consent must be explicit, informed, specific, and freely given for the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations1. Ruth did not give any explicit consent for the transfer of her medical information to the hospital, nor was she informed or asked about it. Moreover, consent cannot be relied on as a transfer mechanism when the data subject is in a situation of distress or dependence, such as a medical emergency, as it would not be considered freely given2. Option C is incorrect because the performance of a contract with Ruth is not a valid transfer mechanism under the GDPR. The transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations on the basis of a contract with the data subject is only allowed if the transfer is necessary for the performance of that contract or for the implementation of pre-contractual measures taken at the data subject's request1. In this scenario, there is no contract between ProStorage and Ruth that requires or justifies the transfer of her medical information to the hospital. The transfer is not necessary for the performance of Ruth's employment contract with ProStorage, nor for any pre-contractual measures taken by Ruth. Option D is incorrect because the protection against legal liability from Ruth is not a valid transfer mechanism under the GDPR. The transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations on the grounds of legal claims or defence is only allowed if the transfer is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims1. In this scenario, there is no legal claim or defence involved in the transfer of Ruth's medical information to the hospital. The transfer is not necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of any legal claim by or against ProStorage or Ruth. Reference: Derogations for specific situations Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679