Monthly Archives: May 2024

Processing Health Data: the Most Recent Amendment to Italian Privacy Code

The Italian “Privacy Code” (Legislative Decree No. 196/2003), which governs data protection in Italy together with the European GDPR, has recently been amended.

Law No. 56/2024, further implementing the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, intervened on section 110 of the Privacy Code, which deals with the processing of health-related data for the purposes of medical, biomedical or epidemiological scientific research.

Section 110 provides that consent of the data subject for the processing of health-related data for the purpose of medical, biomedical or epidemiological scientific research is not required when:

  • the research is carried out on the basis of legal provisions or European Union law, when processing is necessary for scientific research or statistical purposes, provided that an impact assessment is carried out pursuant to sections 35 and 36 of the GDPR; or
  • informing the data subject is impossible or involves a disproportionate effort, or would render impossible or seriously jeopardise the attainment of the purposes of the research.

In such cases – before the latest amendment – the data controller had to:

1) take appropriate measures to protect the rights, freedoms and interests of the data subject;

2) obtain a favorable opinion of the competent ethics committee; and

3) consult the Italian Data Protection Authority prior to processing.

The obligation to consult the Italian Data Protection Authority has now been repealed. Thus, there is no need to apply for the Authority’s clearance prior to processing health-related data (in those cases where consent of the data subject is not required under section 110 of the Privacy Code). 

This amendment may have a significant impact especially on retrospective studies for which informing data subjects is particularly burdensome. The data controller will, in fact, be able to proceed without the Authority’s permission. Nonetheless, the data controller will still have to comply with specific guarantees and ethical rules issued by the Authority – as specified by the amended section 110.

On the one hand, the amended section 110 seems to favor accountability and to soften the procedural requirements in processing health data for research purposes, making the overall procedure quicker. When it comes to “secondary use” of health data, the accountability approach should be considered strong enough to protect data and favorably welcomed, as it moves in the same direction of the European Health Data Space – which intends to provide a reliable and efficient system for the re-use of health data in areas as research and innovation.

On the other hand, though, the Italian Data Protection Authority has already issued some interim guarantees, specifying that data controllers – when processing health data related to deceased or non-contact subjects – must carry out and publish an impact assessment, pursuant to section 35 of the GDPR, notifying it to the Authority. It remains to be seen how the amendment will be handled by the Authority in practice: the effects of the simplification provided by the new version of section 110 may be diminished if the guarantees set forth by the Authority generate equally articulate procedures.      

Effectively Implemented “231” Model Exempts Italian Company from Criminal Corporate Liability

A recent decision of the Milan Court exempted an Italian company from criminal charges under law 231, even while it found its employees guilty of a 231 financial crime.

The Court held that the company’s managers abused of their override powers to systematically ignore internal control systems. Nonetheless, the court found that the company had effectively implemented its compliance 231 model, although such model was fraudulently circumvented by the managers.

The Court confirmed, as already established in the Impregilo case, that the occurrence of a crime does not automatically prove the non-completeness and non-effectiveness of a company’s compliance program. A separate analysis of the compliance program must instead be carried out, even if a crime has occurred and individuals are found guilty.

Under Italian law 231, companies are liable for employees’ crimes when the crime is committed in the interest or to the advantage of the company. Such 231 liability can be lifted if the company has effectively implemented a compliance program aimed at preventing such crime. Despite the incentive built in in 231 law for companies to set up and effectively implement a compliance program, past case law has not been generous in granting such exemption from liability. The recent Milan court case may open a new path.

AI Breakfasts Continue

Our breakfast presentation series dedicated to AI continues. Join us for our next event on May 24, 2024 at 9 via Dante in Milan! Our partner, professor Camilla Ferrari of the University of Milan, will be speaking about the impact of AI on contracts.

Curious about past presentations on AI and AI liability? You may find below our slides (in Italian).