Court case 22/01253 – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2022)
General GDPR enforcement action
This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
In the Netherlands, a patient wanted to see a medical assessment made by a doctor from another hospital about her treatment. The Central Medical Disciplinary Tribunal decided she couldn't access it because the hospital needed to prepare its defense privately. This case highlights the balance between patient rights and hospital defense needs.
What happened
A patient was denied access to a medical assessment made by a doctor from another hospital about her treatment.
Who was affected
The patient who was treated at the hospital and wanted to see the assessment of her treatment.
What the authority found
The Central Medical Disciplinary Tribunal ruled that the hospital could keep the assessment private to prepare its defense against the patient's liability claim.
Why this matters
This decision underscores the importance of allowing hospitals to prepare their legal defenses without disclosing internal assessments. It reminds healthcare providers of the legal protections available when facing liability claims.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
A patient (the data subject) was treated in a hospital. Because she believed that an error had been made, she held the hospital liable. The hospital involved its liability insurer. On behalf of this liability insurer, a doctor from another hospital assessed the data subject's medical file. He checked whether the treatment had been carried out correctly. This doctor did not see the data subject nor was she involved in the investigation in any other way. The data subject found out that this other doctor had made an assessment of the treatment and tried to get access to the findings. The doctor who made the assessment refused her access. The data subject then filed a disciplinary complaint against this doctor with the Regional Medical Disciplinary Tribunal. The Regional Tribunal declared the complaint unfounded. The data subject appealed against this decision to the Central Medical Disciplinary Tribunal. The data subject argued that she should get access to the medical assessment based on the inspection rights from the Medical Treatment Contracts Act (MTCA) laid down in the Dutch Civil Code (article 7:456 BW). However, the Central Tribunal held that the data subject could not appeal to these rights, as an exception in the MTCA was applicable (article 7:464 BW). According to the Central Tribunal, the nature of the legal relationship (the trial) between the data subject and the hospital opposed this. It explained that the hospital had the right to prepare their defence against the data subject's liability claim 'in freedom and seclusion'. In that context, they must also be able to call in another doctor to assess the course of treatment, without the data subject being able to inspect the findings. The Central Tribunal therefore held that there was no obligation to make the medical assessment available to the data subject and declared the complaint unfounded. As a rule, decisions of the Central Tribunal cannot be appealed. However, cassation is possible if it is in the
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 22/01253 in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 22/01253 - Netherlands (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: