Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Saturday, April 4, 2020
On Privacy of Medical Information
On 1.04.2020 was a Media Bulletin, from State Control Room, Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine , Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, with Subject, Daily report on Public Health measures taken for COVID-19.
The above report was incomplete as it contained case numbers from 125 to 234 only, though without mention of Name or other personal details of the affected person. Link
The above report was incomplete as it contained case numbers from 125 to 234 only, though without mention of Name or other personal details of the affected person. Link
Following the above was a WhatsApp forwarded message, with an image of certain document, signed by certain responsible government officials with Names, Address, Contact Numbers of certain Covid affected persons.
There was also a news article about certain twins, born on March 27 at B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital in Raipur, whom the parents, "named after the pandemic", as Corona and Covid. Link
The messages above bring us to consider if Medical Privacy and Confidentiality of Medical Information is something important at all and also of the awareness on the impact of any breach to such.
It would also be worth considering if there were sufficient conditions to deter leak of official and confidential information to any.
There are, in certain countries a ban on baby names, that could possibly hurt a kid in future, for being a slang, or being a target for bullying, teasing or mockery or of derision.
Reproduced below, is an extract, ad verbatim, a section on Medical Privacy as stated in INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, amended upto 08 October 2016.
7.14 The registered medical practitioner shall not disclose the secrets of a patient that have been learnt in the exercise of his / her profession except –
i) in a court of law under orders of the Presiding Judge;
ii) in circumstances where there is a serious and identified risk to a specific person and / or community; and
iii) notifiable diseases.
In case of communicable / notifiable diseases, concerned public health authorities should be informed immediately.
7.14 The registered medical practitioner shall not disclose the secrets of a patient that have been learnt in the exercise of his / her profession except –
i) in a court of law under orders of the Presiding Judge;
ii) in circumstances where there is a serious and identified risk to a specific person and / or community; and
iii) notifiable diseases.
In case of communicable / notifiable diseases, concerned public health authorities should be informed immediately.
Long before, on May 31, 2018, Business Standard examined if India India was to be the first to protect health data of citizens with iron-clad law. Link
Before to this, in 2012, was a Draft on Medical Privacy, published by The Centre for Internet & Society. Link
In 2008, the Indian Journal for Medical Ethics has dealt on Privacy and the Right to Information Act, 2005 Link
The above would sure make into the debate rooms, in colleges and interviews, I suppose.
Wednesday, March 4, 2020
Binging the Bitcoin Will Soon Bounce Board. DLaw.in
The Supreme Court, on 04 Mar 2019, in it's Judgment stated that the impugned circular of RBI dated 06-04-2018 was liable to be set aside. The circular refers to the "Prohibition on dealing in Virtual Currencies (VC's)
The petitioners, according to the Judgment in INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION
OF INDIA vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, has sought for a "direction to the respondents not to restrict or restrain banks and
financial institutions regulated by RBI, from providing access to the banking services, to those engaged in transactions in crypto assets,..."
The petitioners have succeeded in their prayer above by securing a direction from SC to RBI at instructing a bank to defreeze the frozen assets of a petitioner.
Additionally the petitioners have succeeded at causing the impugned circular to be set aside.
What was of interest to www.Dlaw.in and fb.com/Lawyarz was that the impugned order was set aside on the "ground of proportionality", which explains if a VC was legal.
The doctrine of proportionality requires a body to maintain balance between its action and purpose for which the powers have been conferred. http://racolblegal.com
Thursday, January 23, 2020
State of Intellectual Property Appellate Board.
The Judgment document of the MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI, in W.P.(C) 5571/2019 & C.M. Appln. 24540/2019 & 26833/2019 brings to light of the state of Intellectual Property Appellate Board
As per the status report handed over by the Deputy Registrar IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board), on 24 May 2019, there are no Technical Member (Copyright) appointed till date. With respect to Patents, the post of Technical Member (Patents) lying vacant since 04th May, 2016. With respect to Trade Marks, the post of Technical Member (Trade Marks) lying vacant since 05th December, 2018. There is only one Technical Member relatingto Plant Varieties Protection."
There are, as on 23.05.2019 at IPAB, 617 Patent cases pending in the form of appeals and revocation. Further, there are 2626 Trade Mark cases, 01 Geographical Indication case and 691 Copyright cases pending before the IPAB.
At the IPAB, there are vacancies, in the posts of Vice-Chairman (since 22/06/2014)
Technical Member (Trademarks) (since 05/12/2018), Technical Member (Patents)
(since 04/05/2016) and Technical Member
(Copyright) (since date not mentioned)
The Chairman, as per the report of the Union of India, is likely to demit office in around September, 2019.
The term of a patent is only 20 years and in many cases, due to lack of Coram, the patents have expired and the matters have become infructuous and rights of parties have been severely prejudiced.
As per the status report handed over by the Deputy Registrar IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board), on 24 May 2019, there are no Technical Member (Copyright) appointed till date. With respect to Patents, the post of Technical Member (Patents) lying vacant since 04th May, 2016. With respect to Trade Marks, the post of Technical Member (Trade Marks) lying vacant since 05th December, 2018. There is only one Technical Member relatingto Plant Varieties Protection."
There are, as on 23.05.2019 at IPAB, 617 Patent cases pending in the form of appeals and revocation. Further, there are 2626 Trade Mark cases, 01 Geographical Indication case and 691 Copyright cases pending before the IPAB.
At the IPAB, there are vacancies, in the posts of Vice-Chairman (since 22/06/2014)
Technical Member (Trademarks) (since 05/12/2018), Technical Member (Patents)
(since 04/05/2016) and Technical Member
(Copyright) (since date not mentioned)
The Chairman, as per the report of the Union of India, is likely to demit office in around September, 2019.
The term of a patent is only 20 years and in many cases, due to lack of Coram, the patents have expired and the matters have become infructuous and rights of parties have been severely prejudiced.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Divergent Orders
The G.O(Ms)No 172 Abstract states ad verbatim as follows: "Disaster Management - Corona Virus Disease (Covid-19) - Infection preventi...
-
On 1.04.2020 was a Media Bulletin, from State Control Room, Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine , Health and Family Welfar...
-
The Madurai Bench if Madras High Cour on 24 April 2019, has directed the concerned to allow the petitioners appointed through outsourcing,...
-
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, on 29 May 2019 dismissed a Writ Petition praying to "forbear the respondents from demolishing ...









