Commissioner (Cyprus) - 11.17.001.009.077
| Commissioner - 11.17.001.009.077 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Authority: | Commissioner (Cyprus) |
| Jurisdiction: | Cyprus |
| Relevant Law: | Article 5(1)(a) GDPR Article 57(1)(f) GDPR Article 58(2)(i) GDPR Article 83 GDPR |
| Type: | Complaint |
| Outcome: | Upheld |
| Started: | 28.04.2021 |
| Decided: | 07.12.2023 |
| Published: | 07.12.2023 |
| Fine: | 1500 EUR |
| Parties: | Complainant Respondent |
| National Case Number/Name: | 11.17.001.009.077 |
| European Case Law Identifier: | n/a |
| Appeal: | Unknown |
| Original Language(s): | Greek |
| Original Source: | Office of the Commissioner for Personal Data Protection (in EL) |
| Initial Contributor: | Evangelia Tsimpida |
The Cypriot Commissioner for Personal Data Protection, following a complaint, proceeded to fine a doctor for breaching the principle of "lawfulness, fairness and transparency" as provided for in Article 5(1)(a) of the GDPR.
English Summary
Facts
On 28.04.2021 a complaint was submitted to the Office of the Commissioner for Personal Data Protection by the Complainant, who found that on 09.03.2021 her personal data was accessed by the Respondent, a doctor, to the portal of the beneficiaries of the General Health System (ΓεΣΥ), without a referral and without her permission. The reason given for accessing the Complainant's online ΓεΣΥ account was "The provider created a visit without a referral and had the beneficiary's consent to access his/her Medical Record". The Complainant, upon discovering the access to her medical records by the Respondent, attempted to contact her without success. The Health Insurance Agency confirmed the access to the medical data of the complainant by the respondent on 09.03.2021 without issuing a referral, claim for compensation for services or registering a visit involving the complainant. On 19.07.2022, the Respondent provided relevant explanations about the incident to both the Health Insurance Agency and the Commissioner's Office. She confirmed that she indeed did not know and had not examined the Complainant and neither did her secretary have the Complainant's details in her file. In order to access the Complainant's medical records in the ΓεΣΥ computer system, it was necessary to enter the beneficiary's full name, date of birth and ID number, and therefore the Respondent claimed that she assumed that she had spoken to the Complainant by telephone for a visit and thus gained access. Otherwise, she assumed that it was an accidental error in her attempt to access another patient's file. As a considerable amount of time had elapsed, she cannot recall anything specific about the incident. In her explanations, the Respondent insists that there was no processing of the Complainant's personal data and that the Complainant did not suffer any damage as a result of the incident. On 20.07.2022 the Complainant replied to the Respondent's explanations. She claimed that she never contacted the Respondent by telephone nor did she give her personal data to the Respondent's secretary. As soon as she became aware of the breach, she sought the Respondent and contacted her secretary, leaving her full name and telephone number (not her date of birth or her identity) so that the Respondent could call her, but she was unable to contact the Respondent. The Respondent did not add anything else, but persisted in her position.
Holding
The Cypriot Commissioner for Personal Data Protection assessed the above facts, underlining the fact that, as is evident from both sides, the Respondent did not know the Complainant nor had examined her. Furthermore, it is an important element that the doctor could not prove that she obtained the Complainant's personal data in a lawful manner and that she was authorised to access the beneficiary portal. The Commissioner noted that the possession of the Complainant's data, as well as access to the Complainant's beneficiary record on the ΓεΣΥ, constituted acts of processing on the part of the Respondent. Factors such as the absence of malicious intent or the absence of harm do not affect the fact that there was indeed a breach of the Complainant's data. Furthermore, the Commissioner held that the personal data required for access to the complainant's medical file did not suggest that this was an accidental occurrence. Taking the above into account, the Commissioner considered that there was a violation of Article 5(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, because the Complainant's personal data were not processed lawfully and fairly in a transparent manner and pursuant to Article 58(2)(i) and Article 83 of the GDPR imposed an administrative fine of one thousand five hundred euros (EUR 1,500) on the Respondent.
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
English Machine Translation of the Decision
The decision below is a machine translation of the Greek original. Please refer to the Greek original for more details.
I reviewed a complaint submitted to my Office regarding access to the Complainant's General Health System (GHS) account by a medical practitioner. Specifically, as the Complainant mentioned, she found access to her personal data from the doctor, on the GeSY beneficiary portal, without knowing the doctor, without a referral and without her permission. During the investigation, both the Complainant and the doctor reported to my Office that each did not know the other and that the doctor did not examine the complainant. I evaluated the doctor's positions regarding the possible ways of obtaining the Complainant's data, which were necessary to access the Complainant's beneficiary portal at the NHS. However, the doctor was unable to prove that she legally obtained the Complainant's personal data and that she was authorized to gain access to the beneficiary portal. Therefore, the Complainant's personal data were not processed lawfully and legitimately in a transparent manner. That is, the principle of "legality, objectivity and transparency", as provided for in Article 5(1)(a) of the Regulation, was not observed. For the violation of this article, I imposed on the doctor an administrative fine of one thousand five hundred euros (€1500).
