The information on which the search is based has been translated by a computer system without human intervention. It may contain errors in vocabulary, syntax or grammar. The translation may also produce mistakes in the searches performed.
111 results were found for your search terms Healthcare facility
Accesses to the HC.
IP 365/2017
The complaint is filed because evidence of unjustified accesses to l'HC of the accusing person is not observed.
12/06/2018
He lacks attention upward from access previously loved by the Authority.
PS 55/2017
The ICS is accused of the severe offense to hinder the law of access of the complaining person who was an object of the PT 10/2017. Several requirements in the ICS have been made so that it satisfied the law of access of the affected person but to date of today the documentation would not have been given in a complete way yet.
31/05/2018
Safety measures.
IP 205/2017
Inexistent facts. During the phase of previous information, has been made evident that the controversial documents that in a first moment it had been thought that were lost it works out that really they had never existed. It is a severe offense for this that cannot be imputed for breach of the safety measures.
12/04/2018
Contribution of medical data to judicial processes
CNS 7/2018
From the prospect of the regime of communication of particulars foreseen in the LOPD, there is sufficient legal habilitation in the article 11.2.a) of the LOPD in relation to the rules contained in the legislation of Health (art. 16.3 and art. 83 LGS), Social Security (DA tens LGSS) and in the LICS (art 15.1 LICS ), as well as with the article 24 of the CE for the communication of particulars of health suitable, pertinent and non excessive, that have to incorporate into the legal actions of claim of the amounts of the services welfare loaned by the public centers of health to the insurer companies, without the consent of the person concerned nor the requirement for the judicial authority. Once the RGPD is applicable, the juridical basis for these treatments is foreseen in the article 9.2.h) and 9.2.f) of the RGPD with the limits established by the article 5 of the RGPD, in particular the principle of minimization of the data. Therefore, this habilitation will have to be limited to those indispensable minimum data for the fulfillment of the supposed purposes for those treatments.
07/03/2018
Denial of the law of access not to have the requested data.
PT 60/2017
The present protection of rights is rejected because the law of access does not reach to know the identity of the staff that, pèro in more, has accessed the HC in this case when the complaining person exercised the right to the traceability of its clinical history in relation to two accesses that had been produced in year 2014, the responsible organ any more did not have the requested data and this because the minimum duty to preserve the data of the register of accesses is 2 years and in the case that it occupies for us already had passed abundantly.
08/02/2018
Access to the clinical history of a minor on the part of its progenitor
CNS 58/2017
Since the procedure of helplessness entails the temporary suspension of the parental authority (CCC and LDOIA) and, consequently, the impossibility about exercising the rights I ARCO for representation (art. 23.2.b) RLOPD, and arts. 13 Law 21/2000 and 18 Law 41/2002), it does not correspond to the entity to give access to the information requested by the progenitor of the minor.
12/01/2018
Reiteration of the of access in less than 12 months with concurrence of legitimate interest.
The claim is loved upward from access for formal reasons as well as in the background. As for the form, because the responsible for the treatment did not give answer to the request of access in the specified period to the effect. And as for the background|bottom, because although in 12 former months the law|right of access had been made effective, the concurrence of a legitimate interest justified the second request in the mentioned deadline|installment, so that it|he had to become effective.
22/12/2017
to a determinate treatment -communication- of data
Claim estimation for not having attended to request of opposition|entrance examination finishes some 10 days. As for the background|bottom, it is rejected because the opposition|entrance examination only works in the consent of the affected one when the treatment is not based, and the basis of the treatment was the consent here. Moreover, before exercising|exerting the law|right of opposition|entrance examination in relation to a concrete cession of particulars, the responsible organ had already provided its|his|her|their data, so that the law|right of opposition|entrance examination could not be exercised|exerted in the face of an eventual cession that would already have been made.
21/12/2017
Communication of patients data to Mutual collaborators with the Social Security
CNS 15/2017
There is sufficient legal habilitation so that the Hospital, when sanitary assistance to a patient for derivation from a Benefit Society gives collaborator with the Social Security, communicates him the diagnosis of the worker without its express consent (art. 7.3 LOPD), for the fulfillment of the functions of management of the economic benefits and the sanitary assistance derived from professional contingencies (art. 82.2 LGSS), and of follow-up and control of the temporary incapacity for common contingencies (art. 82.4, b sections) and d) LGSS).
11/04/2017
Cession of data from a sanitary center to the doctors of patients company who work risk for the security of third parties in works that could imply a height
CNS 16/2017
In sight the regulations, there is not legal habilitation for the cession of patients data with active consumption of addictive substances and with a profession of risk for third, from the Hospital that attends to the patient in the company in which it works. The duty of complaint (art. 262 LECrim) he fits out the communication to the courts and courts or the Fiscal Ministry of facts that they can be constitutive of crimes public, and not to the complaint of mere suspicions, facts or circumstances that could influence on the future commission of some crime or of other situations of risk. It is not inferred from the regulations (LOPD, CP and LECrim) that the judge can fit out the communication of data of the patient given in the Hospital, in the company, to lack, through a dispensation punctual and for concrete cases, of the express consent of the one affected or of a habilitation sufficient in rules with legal rank.
07/04/2017
Total number of pages: 12