Protecting the Public and Our Physicians' Interests: A Proposal to Rectify Inconsistencies and Develop Guidelines on Physicians' Disclosure of Patients' Health Data to Third Parties in Thailand

This article argues for law reform in Thailand concerning the protection of health data, particularly laws involving the data’s disclosure to third parties. It has been found that several pieces of Thai legislation governing this area are conflicting, causing confusion and disquiet to Thai physicians. Recently, Parliament has enacted the Personal Data Protection Act 2019. The said GDPR-style Act should have clarified all already-existing confusion regarding the inconsistency of legislation, but it has further complicated the matter instead. Doctors cannot disclose patients’ health data to third parties, even to protect others or public interests. Court cases from other jurisdictions show that courts are willing to impose on physicians the duty to disclose patients’ health data to third parties under certain circumstances, which makes the issue more significant to the Thai legal and medical communities. The article provides proposals to rectify the issue by amending relevant statutes and calling for professional guidance on this area which should be addressed by pertinent legislation. The relevant professional guidelines alongside the amended legislation will serve the interests of medical professionals, patients, and society at large.

Auditors’ Negligence and Professional Misconduct in India: A Struggle for a Consistent Legal Standard

Gross negligence is a severe form of negligence. Its severity has been characterized using the presence of a mental element or mens rea accompanying the negligent act. Within the context of professional negligence, gross negligence is important as it constitutes professional misconduct. For auditors, a finding of professional misconduct through disciplinary proceedings can result in suspension or expulsion from the profession. In India, gross negligence is regularly used in disciplinary proceedings against auditors and also by the Securities and Exchange Board to determine whether an auditor has violated any securities regulations. Given the implications of a finding of gross negligence on the practice of an auditor, this paper seeks to discuss this Indian legal standard in detail. Using the statutory framework that governs auditors as a backdrop, this paper examines all reported High Court decisions from the 1950s till 2019 along with decisions of the Securities and Exchange Board with regards to an auditor’s duties. We find that the approach used to discern the existence of gross negligence across these decisions has been inconsistent. In the absence of any precedent from the Supreme Court of India that details what comprises gross negligence in the context of auditors, this inconsistent approach poses a problem. This paper offers a starting point for a discussion to minimize the uncertainty currently associated with auditors’ liability for professional misconduct, especially hoping to assist the newly established National Financial Reporting Authority in its decision-making process.