https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168425 Medical confidentiality and the right to privacy are not absolute where disclosure is necessary to protect an identifiable third party from a serious communicable health risk. The SC stated that ethical duties permit disclosure when public interest and another person's right to life and health require it, and that a person with a communicable venereal disease cannot insist on an unqualified right to marry if the union may expose the prospective spouse to infection. In that context, disclosure of the appellant's HIV-positive status was held justified, there was no breach of confidentiality or privacy, and the claim for damages failed. en-us Mon, 21 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:46:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168425 Medical confidentiality and the right to privacy are not absolute where disclosure is necessary to protect an identifiable third party from a serious communicable health risk. The SC stated that ethical duties permit disclosure when public interest and another person's right to life and health require it, and that a person with a communicable venereal disease cannot insist on an unqualified right to marry if the union may expose the prospective spouse to infection. In that context, disclosure of the appellant's HIV-positive status was held justified, there was no breach of confidentiality or privacy, and the claim for damages failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168425