DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Ca: Charges laid under the Health Information Act

Posted on October 18, 2012 by Dissent

From the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta:

Thirty-four charges have been laid against an individual under the Health Information Act, along with six additional charges under the Criminal Code. The charges have not yet been proven in Court.

As a result of a self-reported breach to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the Commissioner opened an offence investigation into suspicious accesses to health information. Upon completion of the investigation, the matter was referred to Crown prosecutors at Alberta Justice. Thirty-one charges under the Health Information Act were then laid for improperly accessing other individuals’ health information, one charge was laid for inappropriate use of health information, one charge was laid for inappropriate disclosure of health information and one charge was laid for knowingly falsifying a record. Six additional charges were laid under the Criminal Code.

This is the third time charges have been laid under provisions of the Health Information Act. The maximum penalty for a first offence under the Health Information Act is $50,000 for each charge.

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← Ca: Calgary Board of Education hit by new privacy breach as laptop containing 2,000 report cards stolen
UK: Housing association email attachment gaffe discloses employees’ sensitive personal information →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Washington Post investigating cyberattack on journalists, WSJ reports
  • Resource: State Data Breach Notification Laws – June 2025
  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files
  • A guilty plea in the PowerSchool case still leaves unanswered questions
  • Brussels Parliament hit by cyber-attack

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
  • Data Categories and Surveillance Pricing: Ferguson’s Nuanced Approach to Privacy Innovation
  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.