data: pdpc_decisions_version_detail: 9 rows where nature = "Consent"

9 rows where nature = "Consent"

descending

_commit_at	_commit_hash	_id	_item	_version	_commit	description	tags	date	pdf-url	nature	title	url	timestamp	pdf-content	decision	_item_full_hash	_changed_columns
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	27	27	1	952	Both organisations were found not in breach of the PDPA in relation to complaints regarding alleged collection and disclosure of personal data without consent.	[ "Consent", "Not in Breach", "Real Estate", "No breach" ]	2022-06-16	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Decision---SLP-Scotia-Pte-Ltd-and-SLP-International-Property-Consultants-Pte-Ltd---09042022.pdf	Consent	No Breach of the Consent Obligation by SLP Scotia and SLP International Property Consultants	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2022/06/no-breach-of-the-consent-obligation-by-slp-scotia-and-slp-international-property-consultants	2022-06-16	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION Case No. DP-2007-B6585, DP-2007-B6591, DP-2007-B6594, DP-2007-B6598 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And SLP Scotia Pte. Ltd. SLP International Property Consultants Pte. Ltd. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION 1. Between 10 to 14 July 2020, the Personal Data Protection Commission (the “Commission”) received four complaints against SLP International Property Consultants Pte Ltd (“SLPIPC”) and its subsidiary SLP Scotia Pte Ltd (“SLPS”) (collectively, the “Organisations”). The complainants were property agents registered through SLPS (the “Complainants”). 2. As a merger was due to take place between the Organisations, on 7 July 2020, SLPIPC initiated the registration of salespersons in SLPS as salespersons in SLPIPC with the Council of Estate Agencies (“CEA”). CEA thereafter emailed the Complainants asking them to either initiate a salesperson application to join SLPIPC or disregard the email if they were not interested in registering with SLPIPC (the “Incident”). 1 3. The Complainants alleged that: a. they had not consented to be contacted for such purposes; and b. SLPS had improperly disclosed their personal data (including NRIC number, date of birth, and home address) to SLPIPC, and SLPIPC had in turn improperly disclosed the data to CEA. 4. CEA is the entity which administers the registration of salespersons (such as the Complainants) under the Estate Agents Act 2010 (“EAA”). Pursuant to section 29(1) of the EAA, a person may not act as a salesperson for any estate agent unless he or she is registered; the said register is maintained by the CEA pursuant to section 36 of the EAA. Further, under section 40(1) of the EAA, a salesperson may not be registered to act as a salesperson for more than one estate agent at any one time. 5. SLPIPC disclosed the personal data of the Complainants to CEA for the purposes of the change in registration from SLPS to SLPIPC. In doing so, SLPIPC was complying with its obligations under the…	Not in Breach	81943b55f3e50d31e820edf46499ec3602f370c0	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	40	40	1	952	A financial penalty of $21,000 was imposed on Neo Yong Xiang for using his customers' personal data to register for prepaid SIM cards without their consent. The SIM cards were subsequently sold to anonymous individual(s) who used them to send specified messages in contravention of the Do Not Call provisions of the PDPA.	[ "Consent", "Financial Penalty", "Others" ]	2022-03-10	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Decision---Neo-Yong-Xiang---29102021.pdf	Consent	Breach of the Consent and Purpose Limitation Obligations by Neo Yong Xiang trading as Yoshi Mobile	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2022/03/breach-of-the-consent-and-purpose-limitation-obligations-by-neo-yong-xiang-trading-as-yoshi-mobile	2022-03-10	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2021] SGPDPC 12 Case No. DP-2013-B8088 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And Neo Yong Xiang (trading as Yoshi Mobile) … Organisation DECISION Neo Yong Xiang (trading as Yoshi Mobile) Lew Chuen Hong, Commissioner — Case No. DP-2013-B8088 29 October 2021 Introduction 1. When customers purchased pre-paid SIM cards from a mobile phone shop at Geylang Road, they would not have anticipated that their personal data would be misused to register additional SIM cards for illegal sale. Unfortunately, this was exactly what happened to at least 78 individuals who purchased pre-paid M1 SIM cards from one Mr Neo Yong Xiang (“NYX”) the sole proprietor of Yoshi Mobile (“YM”). 2. The Commission observed that between January 2020 and November 2020, there were 3,636 Do Not Call (“DNC”) complaints from persons who received specified messages even though their telephone numbers are registered with the DNC register1. Further analysis revealed that 1,379 of the messages were sent from 98 SIM cards registered at YM. The Commission initiated investigations against NYX (trading as YM) for suspected breaches of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (“PDPA”). Facts of the Case 3. NYX has operated YM since 2013. As an exclusive retailer of M1 SIM cards, NYX was provided a terminal device installed at YM’s premises for the purposes of 1 Under Section 43 of the PDPA, a person is not allowed to send specified messages to a Singapore telephone number registered with the DNC register unless the person has, at the time where he sends the specified message, valid confirmation that the Singapore telephone number is not listed in the DNC register. SIM card registration (the “M1 Terminal Device”). SIM card registration had to be carried out in accordance with the conditions of M1’s telecommunications licence granted under Section 5 of the Telecommunications Act (Chapter 323). The typical SIM card registration process in YM would be a…	Financial Penalty	9701ccc45e49e35f3e4018e10b92d445aca1c569	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	62	62	1	952	A warning was issued to Greatearth Corporation for failing to obtain consent to disclose personal data of 8 crane operators on the external façade of a construction site.	[ "Consent", "Warning", "Construction", "Consent", "Ban list", "Acting in Course of Employment" ]	2021-05-12	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Decision---Progressive-Builders-and-Greatearth-Corporation---16042021-(002).pdf	Consent	Breach of the Consent Obligation by Greatearth Corporation, No Breach of the PDPA by Progressive Builders	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2021/05/breach-of-the-consent-obligation-by-greatearth-corporation	2021-05-12	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2021] SGPDPC 2 Case No. DP-1907-B4305 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And (1) Progressive Builders Private Limited (2) Greatearth Corporation Pte. Ltd. … Organisation DECISION 1 (1) Progressive Builders Private Limited; (2) Greatearth Corporation Pte. Ltd. [2021] SGPDPC 2 Yeong Zee Kin, Deputy Commissioner — Case No. DP-1907-B4305 16 April 2021 Introduction 1 This case involves a series of incidents that led to the unauthorised collection, use, and disclosure of the personal data of 8 individuals (the “Complainants”) by Greatearth Corporation Pte. Ltd. (“GCPL”). On 19 and 20 July 2019, the Personal Data Protection Commission (the “Commission”) received complaints from each of the Complainants alleging that their personal data had been disclosed by Progressive Builders Private Limited (“PBPL”) without their consent (the “Complaints”). The Commission commenced an investigation into the Complaints. Facts of the Case 2 The Complainants are tower crane operators engaged by Craneworks Pte Ltd (“the Subcontractor”) to operate tower cranes for the Subcontractor’s clients, including PBPL. PBPL is the main contractor for a housing project in Geylang (the “Geylang Project”) and is in charge of the Geylang Project worksite (the “Geylang Worksite”). PBPL had collected the Complainants’ personal data (including their full name, NRIC, contact number and photograph) when they were appointed as tower crane operators for the Geylang Project. The collection of their personal data was for the purposes of managing the Complainants’ roles as tower crane operators. The Subcontractor is a sub-contractor of PBPL for the Geylang Project. It supplies licensed crane operators to PBPL for the operation of tower cranes. 3 GCPL is also a company that is in the construction business. It is the main contractor for a housing project in Clementi (the “Clementi Project”) and is in charge of the Clementi 2 Project worksite (“Clemen…	Warning	3df9d84ac2b94b9eceb608d856f98239db7a49bc	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	159	159	1	952	Telcos were not found in breach of the PDPA for charging subscribers for the provision of Caller Number Non-Display value added services.	[ "Consent", "Not in Breach", "Information and Communications", "Singtel", "Starhub", "M1" ]	2019-06-06	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Grounds-of-Decision---3-Telcos---06062019.pdf	Consent	No Breach of the Withdrawal of Consent Obligation by Telcos	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2019/06/no-breach-of-the-withdrawal-of-consent-obligation-by-telcos	2019-06-06	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2019] SGPDPC 12 Case No DP-1609-B0229 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And 1. Starhub Mobile Pte Ltd 2. M1 Limited 3. Singtel Mobile Singapore Pte. Ltd. … Organisations DECISION Data protection – Consent obligation – Withdrawal of consent Starhub Mobile Pte Ltd, M1 Limited and Singtel Mobile Singapore Pte. Ltd. [2019] SGPDPC 12 Yeong Zee Kin, Deputy Commissioner — Case No DP-1609-B0229 6 June 2019. Background 1 The present matter arose from a complaint made by an individual mobile subscriber (“Complainant”), in relation to the current industry practice of mobile network operators charging for the provision of Caller Number NonDisplay (“CNND”) services. The CNND service is offered on a per-line basis affecting all out-going calls made using a particular telephone number. When activated by a subscriber, the CNND service essentially prevents the subscriber’s telephone number from being displayed on call recipients’ devices. 2 The Organisations are the three mobile network operators in Singapore. They offer a range of telecommunication services to subscribers, in particular, mobile telephony services. They also offer CNND as an optional value-added service to their subscribers. All the Organisations share a common practice of charging subscribers for the provision of CNND services, although the precise charges differ from Organisation to Organisation. 3 The key question which has to be determined in this case is whether section 16 of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (“PDPA”) prohibits organisations from imposing charges for the provision of CNND services. The Starhub Mobile Pte Ltd and others [2019] SGPDPC 12 findings and grounds of decision based on the Commission’s investigation are set out below. Material Facts 4 The Complainant is an individual subscriber of StarHub Mobile Pte Ltd (“StarHub”)’s mobile services. He had written to StarHub to request the withdrawal of his consent to the disclos…	Not in Breach	d14207cb5ac452bf33a3e97f370a686be33c72ca	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	162	162	1	952	A warning was issued to H3 Leasing for disclosing personal data online without the consent of the individual concerned.	[ "Consent", "Warning", "Transport and Storage", "Vehicle rental" ]	2019-06-06	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Grounds-of-Decision---H3-Leasing---06062019.pdf	Consent	Breach of the Consent Obligation by H3 Leasing	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2019/06/breach-of-the-consent-obligation-by-h3-leasing	2019-06-06	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2019] SGPDPC 9 Case No DP-1803-B1859 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And H3 Leasing … Organisation DECISION H3 Leasing [2019] SGPDPC 9 H3 Leasing [2019] SGPDPC 9 Yeong Zee Kin, Deputy Commissioner — Case No DP-1803-B1859 6 June 2019 Background 1. The complaint concerns the disclosure of personal data without consent by H3 Leasing (the “Organisation”). The Organisation is in the business of rental of motor vehicles in Singapore. 2. The Complainant was a member of the public who had come across a post on social media by the Organisation disclosing scanned images of the NRIC of another individual (“Affected Individual”). The personal data disclosed by virtue of this comprised the full name, residential address, date of birth, NRIC number, NRIC photo and the thumbprint image of the Affected Individual (the “Personal Data Set”). On 8 March 2018, the Complainant filed a complaint with the Personal Data Protection Commission (the “Commission”) in relation to the disclosure of the Personal Data Set by the Organisation. 3. The key issue raised by the Complaint is whether the Organisation had the consent required under section 13 of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (the “PDPA”) to disclose the Personal Data Set of the Affected Individual in the manner and for the purposes which they did. 4. Following an investigation into the matter by the Personal Data Protection Commission, I found the Organisation in breach of section 13 of the PDPA. 2 H3 Leasing [2019] SGPDPC 9 Material Facts 5. On 15 December 2017, the Affected Individual rented a motor vehicle from the Organisation. He voluntarily provided a copy of his NRIC and entered into an agreement with the Organisation for that purpose. 6. Subsequently, the Affected Individual went into rental arrears and ceased contact with the Organisation. The Organisation was unable to locate him or the motor vehicle and made a police report concerning the…	Warning	975a9880e3865b938caf22061b31d292c5d3e479	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	163	163	1	952	German European School Singapore was found not to be in breach of the PDPA in relation to allegations that there was no consent given for the collection of its student’s hair sample for the purpose of drug testing.	[ "Consent", "Not in Breach", "Education", "Student" ]	2019-06-03	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Grounds-of-Decision---German-European-School-Singapore---030619.pdf	Consent	No Breach of the Consent Obligation by German European School Singapore	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2019/06/no-breach-of-the-consent-obligation-by-german-european-school-singapore	2019-06-03	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2019] SGPDPC 8 Case No DP-1712-B1471 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And German European School Singapore … Organisation DECISION German European School Singapore [2019] SGPDPC 8 Yeong Zee Kin, Deputy Commissioner — Case No DP-1712-B1471 3 June 2019. Background 1 This case concerns a complaint made by the father (the “Complainant”) of a student1 (“AB”) at the German European School Singapore (“GESS”). The central issue raised in the complaint, in so far as it relates to the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (“PDPA”), was that GESS had collected and used personal data of AB without valid consent in the course of conducting a random drug test. GESS has not denied that it had collected the personal data of AB but has asserted that it did so with valid consent. The brief facts of the case are as follows. 2 On 6 December 2017, AB was selected by staff of GESS for random drug testing and asked to provide a hair sample by cutting for the drug test. This was done in accordance with GESS’ internal procedures and pursuant to its school bye-laws which provided that it may conduct drug testing at random or in cases of “proven suspicion”. When the Complainant found out about this later that day, he immediately contacted the Principal of GESS via email to 1 As this individual is a minor, his name and the names of his parents are omitted from this Decision. German European School Singapore [2019] SGPDPC 8 object to the test being done on his son. The complainant also requested that the results of the test be given to him in its unopened envelope, as received by the school. 3 In a turn of events, the drug test could not be conducted on AB’s hair sample as it apparently had not been stored correctly after it had been cut when it was sent to the overseas testing laboratory engaged by GESS to conduct the drug test2. Following the email correspondence between the Complainant and the Principal, the Complainant and his…	Not in Breach	987d60071fb1ca62d5f365695fbcb87e5d8703f3	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	175	175	1	952	A warning was issued to Big Bubble Centre for disclosing personal data online without the consent of the individuals concerned.	[ "Consent", "Warning", "Arts, Entertainment and Recreation", "Scuba diving" ]	2018-11-28	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/Grounds-of-Decision---Big-Bubble-Centre---281118.pdf	Consent	Breach of the Consent Obligation by Big Bubble Centre	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2018/11/breach-of-the-consent-obligation-by-big-bubble-centre	2018-11-28	PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION [2018] SGPDPC 25 Case No DP-1802-B1770 In the matter of an investigation under section 50(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 And Big Bubble Centre … Organisation DECISION Big Bubble Centre [2018] SGPDPC 25 Big Bubble Centre Yeong Zee Kin, Deputy Commissioner — Case No DP-1802-B1770 28 November 2018 1. The circumstances which led to the complaint over Big Bubble Centre’s (the “Organisation”) actions is a common one in today’s social media age. It usually starts with a dispute between an individual and an organisation and quickly escalates from there. One party expresses unhappiness with the other on social media and the other party then responds on social media to defend themselves. During the exchange, personal data is disclosed and is accessible to all and sundry. The approach of the Personal Data Protection Commission (“PDPC”) in such cases has been stated in Re My Digital Lock Pte Ltd [2018] SGPDPC 3 and Re M Star Movers & Logistics Specialist Pte Ltd [2017] SGPDPC 15 and that approach has been followed in this case. 2. The Organisation is a sole-proprietorship in the scuba-diving services business. The Complainant is an ex-employee of the Organisation. 3. The key issue is whether by using the personal data, the Organisation has: a) breached its obligation under section 13 of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (“PDPA”) to obtain valid consent before disclosing personal data; or b) breached its obligation under section 18 of the PDPA to only use and disclose personal data for purposes (i) that a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances; and (ii) that the data subject has been informed of. Material Facts 4. The Complainant and the Organisation had a contractual dispute in which the Complainant claimed that the Organisation had failed to pay his wages. The Complainant resigned and took dive equipment which he claims to have paid for. 5. The Organisation, however, refutes these claims and say that they withheld $600 from the Complain…	Warning	09ebd633a030b216def95af0bcc6a92e9d25d637	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	228	228	1	952	A financial penalty of $500 was imposed on a registered salesperson of a property firm for disclosing personal data of two of his landlord’s tenants to a third party tenant without consent.	[ "Consent", "Financial Penalty", "Others", "ESTATE", "Property", "SALESPERSON" ]	2016-08-12	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/grounds-of-decision---rsp-justin-chua-(120816).pdf	Consent	Breach of Consent Obligation by a Registered Salesperson	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2016/08/breach-of-consent-obligation-by-a-registered-salesperson	2016-08-12	DECISION OF THE PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION Case Number: DP-1411-A247 CHUA YONG BOON JUSTIN [NRIC NO. REDACTED] ... Respondent Decision Citation: [2016] SGPDPC 13 GROUNDS OF DECISION 12 August 2016 A. INTRODUCTION 1. On 15 November 2014, the Personal Data Protection Commission (the “Commission”) received an email from [Redacted] (Replaced with Mr K) (the “Complainant”) regarding the unauthorised disclosure of personal data of his wife and himself by the property agent of his landlord following a dispute between the Complainant, the Complainant’s wife, and another tenant, [Redacted] (Replaced with Ms C). The Commission proceeded to investigate into the alleged breach of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (“PDPA”). Its findings into the matter are set out below. B. MATERIAL FACTS AND DOCUMENTS 2. The Complainant, his wife, and Ms C are tenants of a landed property. For the purposes of entering into the tenancy with the landlord, the Complainant and his wife had previously provided their names and NRIC numbers (amongst other personal data) to the registered salesperson1 (commonly known as a “property agent”) of the landlord, Mr Chua Yong Boon Justin (the “Respondent”). The Respondent was registered as a salesperson with Global Property Strategic Alliance Pte Ltd (“GPS”). The Respondent’s engagement as a salesperson with GPS was governed by a “Salesperson Agreement” dated 31 October 2011. 3. In or around November 2014, a dispute arose between Ms C and the Complainant and his wife over the usage of common space within the rented premises, and an argument had apparently ensued between the parties. The Respondent was not present during the argument. However, Ms C had informed him of the argument, and also requested the Respondent to provide her with the 1 Under the Estate Agents Act (Cap. 95A) (“EAA”) Page 1 of 5 names and NRIC numbers of the Complainant and his wife so as to hold the Complainant “responsible” in the event that the Complainant had publicised the photos that were apparently take…	Financial Penalty	028172bef7256a4b868d532ab6c60d23871e1eff	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]
2023-10-01T11:02:10+08:00	fbd32491db44d3d0c97aa12a99cefd61ec954264	233	233	1	952	A warning was issued to YesTuition Agency for disclosing tutors’ personal data on its website without consent.	[ "Consent", "Warning", "Education", "YESTUITION", "Tuition" ]	2016-04-21	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/Files/PDPC/PDF-Files/Commissions-Decisions/grounds-of-decision---yestuition-agency-(210416).pdf	Consent	Breach of Consent Obligation by YesTuition Agency	https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/all-commissions-decisions/2016/04/breach-of-consent-obligation-by-yestuition-agency	2016-04-21	DECISION OF THE PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION COMMISSION Case Number: DP-1407-A028 YESTUITION AGENCY (UEN No. 53084839B) …Respondent Decision Citation: [2016] SGPDPC 5 GROUNDS OF DECISION 20 April 2016 BACKGROUND 1. On 16 July 2014, the Personal Data Protection Commission (“Commission”) received information that YESTUITION AGENCY (UEN 53084839B) (the “Respondent”) had disclosed on its website the NRIC numbers and images of certain individuals who had registered to be tutors with the Respondent and it was alleged that they had done so without the consent of the individuals concerned. 2. In light of the information received, the Commission commenced an investigation under section 50 of the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (No. 26 of 2012) (the “PDPA”) to ascertain whether there had been a breach by the Respondent of its obligations under the PDPA. The Commission’s findings are set out below. MATERIAL FACTS AND DOCUMENTS 3. The Respondent is a locally registered business providing home tuition matching services to individuals seeking tutors for primary to A-levels education. The Respondent renders its matching services via a website, which it operates at www.yestuition.sg (the “Site”). 4. The Site consists of various webpages that are accessible to the public and a tutors’ log-in portal which is accessible only by individuals who had registered with the Respondent to be a tutor. Disclosure of NRIC numbers and images by the Respondent 5. From the Commission’s examination of the Site, it was found that the Respondent had published images of its tutors on its Site. The tutors’ images were stored in a JPEG file format and named using the tutors’ respective NRIC particulars, for example, as 1234567A.jpg. As such, the Respondent had also disclosed the tutors’ respective NRIC numbers with the images. CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 5 6. The NRIC numbers and images were at the material time made publicly discoverable and accessible via a directory listing on one of the Site’s pages. Investigations by the Commission indica…	Warning	20a97b6ebe97b71c317c4befaebf71b555f828dd	[ "pdf-content", "timestamp", "decision", "pdf-url", "tags", "nature", "url", "title", "date", "description" ]

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited

CREATE VIEW pdpc_decisions_version_detail AS select
  commits.commit_at as _commit_at,
  commits.hash as _commit_hash,
  pdpc_decisions_version.*,
  (
    select json_group_array(name) from columns
    where id in (
      select column from pdpc_decisions_changed
      where item_version = pdpc_decisions_version._id
    )
) as _changed_columns
from pdpc_decisions_version
  join commits on commits.id = pdpc_decisions_version._commit;

pdpc_decisions_version_detail (view)

9 rows where nature = "Consent"

Advanced export