A civil servant filed a lawsuit against the employer's administration to request that the illegitimacy of the processing of some of his health data be ascertained. The Court ascertained that the processing of sensitive data had not actually complied with the provisions of the legislative decree on the matter as they could be "processed" only in the presence of authorization from the Guarantor for the protection of personal data, in this case not required. However, the Court rejected the claim for damages, on the grounds that the appellant had not provided any evidence on the point. The Supreme Court confirmed the exclusion of compensation for damages by reiterating a profile already outlined on the subject of infringement of the right to privacy, noting that such infringement determines an offense pursuant to art. 2043 of the Civil Code, which, however, does not automatically qualify for compensation, since the moral or patrimonial damage must in any case be proven according to the ordinary rules, whatever its extent and regardless of the difficulty of the relative proof. It could not reach a different conclusion, added the Court, even if the damage in question were identified in terms of non-pecuniary damage deriving from the infringement of the inviolable rights of the person constitutionally guaranteed, since the jurisprudence, in admitting the indemnifiability of the infringement of such rights and in rigorously tracing the boundaries, has contextually recognized that the existence of the relative damage must in any case be proven by the injured party.
[Adv. Ennio Grassini – www.dirittosanitario.net]Thursday, 10 July 2014 – Doctor33
TO
