Scribd
Upload
255 views2 pages

Chan v. Chan

1. Josielene filed for annulment of her marriage to Johnny, claiming he failed to support the family and had mental issues from drinking and drugs. She subpoenaed his medical records from rehabilitation. 2. The court denied the request, finding the records were protected by physician-patient privilege. This privilege aims to encourage open communication between patients and doctors to allow for accurate diagnoses and treatment. 3. While Johnny attached part of the records to his answer, this did not waive privilege, as trial had not begun where the evidence could be formally presented. The court affirmed protecting the full records from disclosure during discovery.

Uploaded by

jdpajarillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
255 views2 pages

Chan v. Chan

1. Josielene filed for annulment of her marriage to Johnny, claiming he failed to support the family and had mental issues from drinking and drugs. She subpoenaed his medical records from rehabilitation. 2. The court denied the request, finding the records were protected by physician-patient privilege. This privilege aims to encourage open communication between patients and doctors to allow for accurate diagnoses and treatment. 3. While Johnny attached part of the records to his answer, this did not waive privilege, as trial had not begun where the evidence could be formally presented. The court affirmed protecting the full records from disclosure during discovery.

Uploaded by

jdpajarillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Topic Physician-Patient Privilege

Case No. GR 179786 / 24 July 2013


Case Name Josielene Chan v. Johnny Chan
Ponente ABAD, J.

RELEVANT FACTS

 PET Josielene filed with the RTC a petition for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to RESP Johnny.
o She claimed that RESP had failed to care for and support his family, and that a psychiatrist diagnosed
him as mentally deficient due to incessant drinking and excessive use of prohibited drugs.
 During pre-trial conference, Josielene pre-marked the Philhealth Claim form that Johnny attached to his
answer to prove he was forcibly confined in rehab.
o The form carried a physician’s note, saying Johnny suffered from “methamphetamine and alcohol
abuse.”
 PET filed a request for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum addressed to Medical City, covering RESP’s
medical records while he was confined there.
 RESP opposed, arguing that the records were covered by physician-patient privilege.
 The RTC denied PET’s motion, and the CA affirmed.
 PET argues that the hospital records are not privileged as it is the examination of the physician at the trial
that is privileged.
o She also argued that since RESP attached the claim form covering the rehabilitation in his answer, he
had waived the privileged character of the records.
EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN TRIAL
PROSECUTION DEFENSE
Subpoena duces tecum covering RESP’s medical n/a
records from confinement

ISSUE AND RATIO DECIDENDI

Issue Ratio
W/N the hospital records of YES
RESP are covered by the
physician-patient privilege 1. The physician-patient privileged communication rule essentially means that
a physician who gets information while professionally attending a patient
cannot in a civil case be examined without the patient’s consent as to any
facts which would blacken the latter’s reputation. This rule is intended to
encourage the patient to open up to the physician, relate to him the history
of his ailment, and give him access to his body, enabling the physician to
make a correct diagnosis of that ailment and provide the appropriate cure.

2. As the offer of evidence is made during the trial, PET’s request for
subpoena duces tecum is premature. She will have to wait for trial to begin
before making a request for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum covering
RESP’s hospital records. It is possible instead to treat the motion as one for
production of documents, a discovery procedure available to a litigant prior
to trial, with the limitation that the documents to be disclosed are not
privileged.

3. To allow the disclosure during discovery procedure of the hospital


records, however, would be to allow access to evidence that is inadmissible
without the patient’s consent. Physicians memorize all this information in
the patient’s records. Disclosing them would be the equivalent of
compelling the physician to testify on privileged matters he gained while
dealing with the patient, without the latter’s prior consent.

4. RESP cannot likewise waive the privilege. Trial in the case had not yet
begun. It cannot be said that RESP had already presented the Philhealth claim
in evidence, the act contemplated which would justify PET requesting an
inquiry into the details of his hospital confinement.

RULING

WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES the petition and AFFIRMS the Decision of the Court of Appeals.

SEPARATE OPINIONS

NOTES

You might also like