The Right to Privacy and Medical Confidentiality – Some Remarks in Light of ECHR Case Law

This article is devoted to a selection of ECHR judgements concerning the right of a patient to have his or her privacy respected, and the corresponding duty of doctors to keep medical confidentiality. The case law of this court confirms the fundamental importance of trust between the patient and the therapist. It also underlines that one important scope of the right to privacy is the patient’s medical data, which is subject to legal protection. The law allows for a limitation of the obligation to maintain medical confidentiality, but only on the basis and within the limits of the [email protected] Wnukiewicz-Kozłowska – dr hab. nauk prawnych, kierownik Interdyscyplinarnej Pracowni Prawa Medycznego i Bioetyki na Wydziale Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.University of Wrocław, PolandBalcerzak M., Zagadnienie precedensu w międzynarodowym prawie praw człowieka, Toruń 2008.Baldwin R.W., Confidentiality between Physician and Patient, “Maryland Law Review” 1962, vol. 22, http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol22/iss3/2.Dzehtsiarou K., European Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights, “German Law Journal” 2011, vol. 12, no. 10.Gostin L. et al., The domains of health responsiveness : a human rights analysis, Health and human rights working paper series World Health Organization 2003, https://apps.wh o.int/iris/handle/10665/73926.Harris D.J., O’Boyle M., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 3rd ed., Oxford 2014.Hellín T., The physician-patient relationship: recent developments and changes, Haemophilia: the Official Journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia”, 01 May 2002, 8(3).Kubiak R., Tajemnica medyczna, (in:) M. Boratyńska, P. Konieczniak (red.), System Prawa Medycznego pod redakcją E. Zielińskiej. Regulacja prawna czynności medycznych, Tom II cz. 1, Warszawa 2019.Kubiak R., Tajemnica medyczna, Warszawa 2015.Letsas G., Strasbourg’s Interpretive Ethic: Lessons for the International Lawyer, “The European Journal of International Law” 2010, vol. 21, no. 3.Maehle A.H., Preserving Confidentiality or Obstructing Justice? Historical Perspectives on a Medical Privilege in Court, “Journal of Medical Law and Ethics” 2015, vol. 3, no. 1-2.Mendelson D., The Duchess of Kingston’s Case, the ruling of Lord Mansfield and duty of medical confidentiality in court, “International Journal of Law and Psychiatry” 2012, no. 35.Silvis J., Human Rights as a Living Concept. Case-law overview, http://www.ejtn.eu/Documents/About%20EJTN/Independent%20Seminars/Human%20Rights%20BCN%2028-29%20April%202014/Case_Law_Digest_Human_Rights_as_a_Living_Concept_SILVIS.pdf.Warren S.D., Brandeis L.D., The Right to Privacy, “Harvard Law Review” 1890, vol. 4, no. 5, https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~shmat/courses/cs5436/warren-brandeis.pdf.Wnukiewicz-Kozłowska A., Prawo do prywatności w kontekście dokumentacji medycznej Praktyka orzecznicza Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, (in:) M. Śliwka, M. Urbaniak (red.), Prowadzenie dokumentacji medycznej. Aspekty prawne oraz zarządcze, Warszawa 2018.25218519

Lenkijos Respublikos teisės aktų derinimas su Europos Sąjungos direktyvomis bioteisės srityje.

The article consists of four parts. The first one in a short way presents the notion of biomedical law. In the second part the author points out the main ways of harmonisation of the Internal law of the Member States of EU by directives. The next part is dedicated to the polish laws connected with the biomedical law. The author analyses two EU directives: the first one about the principles of Good Clinical Practice - the document which is a set of internationally recognised ethical and scientific quality requirements which must be observed for designing, conducting, recording and reporting clinical trials that involve the participation of human subjects and the second one about patenting blomedlcal inventions, comparing them to Polish legal solutions In this field. The last part - conclusions - presents the opinion of the author about the concordance of polish and EU law in the field of biomedicine.Bioteisė yra labai nauja teisės šaka. Jos formavimąsi skatina spartus medicinos mokslo ir technologijų vystymasis. Pagrindinis bioteisės, kartais vadinamos biomedicinos teise, uždavinys yra užtikrinti žmogaus teises ir pareigas biomedicinoje reglamentuojant genų technologijas ir biomedicininius tyrimus. Siame straipsnyje pabrėžiama tarptautinio bendradarbiavimo svarba ir ES eisės aktų adaptacija valstybėse narėse siekiant garantuoti bendrus minimalius standartus bioteisės srityje. Daugiausia dėmesio skiriama ES teisyno ir Lenkijos Respublikos teisės aktų analizei Visą puma nagrinėjamas nacionalinių teisės aktų derinimo su ES direktyvomis procesas remiantis Bendrijos steigiamosios sutarties ir Lenkijos Respublikos stojimo sutarties nuostatomis. Trečioji ir pati svarbiausia straipsnio dalis skirta Lenkijos teisės ir ES teisės aktų atitikties klausimams. Tuo tikslu išsamiai analizuojami pagrindiniai Lenkijos įstatymai ir poįstatyminiai aktai, reglamentuojantys biomedicininius ir genetinius tyrimus, medikų etiką, asmens orumo apsaugą. Išvadose konstatuojama, kad yra keturi galimi direktyvą įgyvendinimo nacionalinėje teisėje variantai. Tačiau vien perkelti direktyvas nepakanka, itin svarbu, kad valstybė narė sugebėtų užtikrinti tinkamą ir efektyvų perkeltų direktyvų įgyvendinimą. Ši nuostata grindžiama ES teisės efektyvumo principu, išplėtotu Europos Teisingumo Teismo jurisprudencijoje

Katedra Prawa Międzynarodowego i Europejskiego (1946–2015)

THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LAW 1946–2015The Department of Public International Law, after the Second World War was founded at the University of Wrocław in 1946. As the first head of this unit was appointed Prof. Stanisław Hubert, the former professor of the Jan Kazimierz University in Lviv. The Wrocław school of international law was grounded and developed by the team of four scientists and academic teachers: Stanisław Hubert, Karol Wolfke, Jan Kolasa and Kazimierz Kocot. In the 1990s the unit was changed into the Department of Public International and European Law as a  consequence of the increasing role of the European Community law within the domain of international relations. At the moment the Departmentis headed by Prof. Krzysztof Wójtowicz. The team is now composed of 12 researchers and associated PhD students. To the main fields of interests of the Department belong issues of sources of international law, law of the treaties, international jurisprudence, institutional and material law of the EU, external relations in the EU, law of international organizations, international criminal law as well as international biomedical law.THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LAW 1946–2015The Department of Public International Law, after the Second World War was founded at the University of Wrocław in 1946. As the first head of this unit was appointed Prof. Stanisław Hubert, the former professor of the Jan Kazimierz University in Lviv. The Wrocław school of international law was grounded and developed by the team of four scientists and academic teachers: Stanisław Hubert, Karol Wolfke, Jan Kolasa and Kazimierz Kocot. In the 1990s the unit was changed into the Department of Public International and European Law as a  consequence of the increasing role of the European Community law within the domain of international relations. At the moment the Departmentis headed by Prof. Krzysztof Wójtowicz. The team is now composed of 12 researchers and associated PhD students. To the main fields of interests of the Department belong issues of sources of international law, law of the treaties, international jurisprudence, institutional and material law of the EU, external relations in the EU, law of international organizations, international criminal law as well as international biomedical law

Interdyscyplinarna Pracownia Prawa Medycznego i Bioetyki (2013–2015)

INTERDISCIPLINARY MEDICAL LAW AND BIOETHICS RESEARCH CENTRE 2013–2015Interdisciplinary Medical Law and Bioethics Research Centre was founded in 2013, on the basis of Rector’s order No. 106/2013. This entity is dedicated to the legal and ethical problems of medicine, biology and biotechnology. Activities of the centre are concentrated on research, education and popularization of issues connected with the development of medical technologies which is very rapid and bringing about difficulties and tensions stemming from both legal and ethical points of view. Interdisciplinary cooperation is very important for the evolution of the centre and that is why one of its main features is involvement in its activities of a  group of lawyers, physicians and academics from different universities and research institutions.INTERDISCIPLINARY MEDICAL LAW AND BIOETHICS RESEARCH CENTRE 2013–2015Interdisciplinary Medical Law and Bioethics Research Centre was founded in 2013, on the basis of Rector’s order No. 106/2013. This entity is dedicated to the legal and ethical problems of medicine, biology and biotechnology. Activities of the centre are concentrated on research, education and popularization of issues connected with the development of medical technologies which is very rapid and bringing about difficulties and tensions stemming from both legal and ethical points of view. Interdisciplinary cooperation is very important for the evolution of the centre and that is why one of its main features is involvement in its activities of a  group of lawyers, physicians and academics from different universities and research institutions

CAUSAL EFFECT RELATIONSHIP IN MEDICAL CASES. AN OLD PROBLEM IN A NEW SCENARIO. COMMENTARY TO CJEU JUDGMENT (SECOND CHAMBER) OF 21 JUNE 2017, N.W. & OTHERS V. SANOFI PASTEUR MSD & OTHERS, CASE C-621/15, EU:C:2017:484 APPROBATIVE GLOSS

This commentary evaluates the problem in assessing the role of a causal connection between damage and the use of a defective medical product, specifically a vaccine. The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Sanofi Pasteur Case, which allowed the possibility of recognizing damage claims, even in cases where the prevailing scientific theory claims that there is no scientific evidence of a causal link between a vaccination and the disease, became a base for consideration. Consequently, procedural solutions (such as the standard of proof required, the admissibility of prima facie evidence reasoning and other solutions in cases of an uncertain causation) remain to be decided by national law. The authors assessed two legal systems: the French and Polish legal systems in the context of how to resolve these dilemmas and to describe the impact of the above-mentioned judgment on the case-law of French and Polish courts as regards the application of Directive 85/374/EEC. As a result, they concluded that the most important interpretative motive has become the individual interest of the vaccination’s victim as a consumer of medical services. It seems to be in accordance with Directive 85/374/EEC, which is motivated by the necessity of approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning the liability of the producer for damage caused by the defectiveness of his products. However, since the existing divergences may distort competition and affect the movement of goods within the common market and entail a differing degree of protection of the consumer against damage caused by a defective product to his health or property, in countries belonging to the European Union, the authors wonder how the commented judgment will affect the further development of consumers protection against defective vaccines