Quevedo & Ponce - Noticias Legales
Superintendence of Personal Data Protection Issues Opinion on the Use of Biometric Data for Attendance Control
- March 20th, 2025
- Quevedo & Ponce
The Superintendence of Personal Data Protection has issued an opinion on Inquiry 002-2025, referenced in Official Letter No. SPDP-IRD-2025-0031-O, regarding the processing of biometric data for labor attendance control.
The authority establishes that explicit consent is required for the processing of biometric data in labor attendance control, and for consent to be considered valid, it must be free, specific, informed, and unequivocal.
Consent must be free, without coercion or undue pressure, and free from vices such as force or real fear, like the fear of losing one’s job. It must be specific, limited to a concrete purpose, and without ambiguity regarding its scope. Additionally, it must be informed, ensuring that the data subject clearly understands the purposes and conditions of the data processing. Finally, it must be unequivocal, expressed clearly and without doubt, ensuring that the data subject’s will is consciously expressed.
Regarding the involved parties:
- Employers: They must ensure the consent of their workers before collecting biometric data and provide alternatives for those who do not wish to provide their data.
- Workers: They may refuse the processing of their biometric data without it affecting their employment conditions and may request the deletion of their biometric data when applicable.
At Quevedo & Ponce, we advise companies and workers to ensure compliance with legal provisions and protect the rights to personal data security. Contact us for guidance on this important precedent and its impact in the labor field.
Más Artículos
WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Associated Traditional Knowledge
The WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Traditional Knowledge, adopted in 2024, establishes an international framework for the protection and recognition of ancestral knowledge. Through innovations such as the disclosure requirement, it promotes transparency in the use of genetic resources and traditional knowledge in patented inventions, ensuring respect for the communities of origin.
Dissolution, Liquidation, and Cancellation of Commercial Companies in Ecuador
The dissolution, liquidation, and cancellation of commercial companies in Ecuador is a key process when a company ceases to operate, no longer generates income, or becomes unprofitable. Closure of the company in a timely manner prevents the accumulation of fiscal and administrative obligations, thereby reducing the risk of sanctions and unnecessary expenses. There are various legal options to perform this procedure, each suited to different circumstances.
Avoid Fines which rank from 2 to 20 Basic Salaries! – Gender Equality Plan for Companies in Ecuador
The Equality Plan must be registered before July 31, 2025, with the Ministry of Labor, or fines ranging from 2 to 20 basic salaries will be imposed on companies and public institutions that fail to comply with the law. This Plan ensures equal treatment and opportunities between women and men in the workplace, promoting inclusion and aiming to eliminate discrimination.
“Bimbo” Brand Rejected in Switzerland: The Importance of Cultural Perceptions in Trademark Registration
In the world of intellectual property, trademark protection involves not only legal aspects but also the social impact of the terms used. A recent case in Switzerland highlights how a trademark can be rejected if its name has immoral or insensitive connotations towards specific social groups.
Administrative Tribunal of Quito Protects the Rights of a Designation Of Origin Registered in the European Union and WIPO
Quevedo & Ponce successfully acted on behalf of the Consorzio Produttori e Tutela della DOP FONTINA in response to a lawsuit filed by an Ecuadorian company, which primarily argued that FONTINA was not registered in Ecuador. However, the Administrative Litigation Tribunal located in the Metropolitan District of Quito upheld the challenged administrative act, citing the risk of consumer confusion and applying Decision 486 of the Andean Community, emphasizing the importance of protecting designations of origin, even without formal registration in Ecuador.
