CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 9 octobre 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 101 October 2007 K.H. and Others v. Slovakia - 32881/04 Decision 9.10.2007 [Section IV] Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for family life Respect for private life Former patients prevented from photocopying medical records: admissible   The applicants are eight women of Roma origin who were treated at gynaecological and obstetrics departments in two hospitals in eastern Slovakia during their pregnancies and deliveries. Despite continuing attempts to conceive, none of the applicants has become pregnant since their last stay in the hospitals, when they delivered via caesarean section. The applicants suspected that the reason for their infertility might be that they were sterilised without their knowledge or consent during the operation. In 2004 each of the applicants issued powers of attorney to lawyers from a non-governmental organisation, who then sought to review and make photocopies of the applicants’ medical records. Having encountered difficulties in gaining access to the records, the applicants instituted proceedings in local courts. As a result, most of the applicants were allowed to view their files. However, their requests to make photocopies were eventually denied with reference to the domestic legislation in force at the time, which provided that medical records were owned by the hospital concerned and that the restriction on access was justified in order to prevent abuse. Following the introduction of new legislation in 2005, all the applicants – except for the second, whose medical records had meanwhile been lost – were eventually afforded full access to the requested medical documentation and allowed to take relevant photocopies thereof. Admissible under Article 8 following the dismissal of the preliminary objection that the applicants could no longer claim to be “victims”. Also admissible under Article 6   §   1 (access to court) and under Article 13 (effective remedy).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes