Who may demand a treating clinic's medical reports or records about an insured worker, and on what finding may that demand be made?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file we read the worker's insurance benefit claim and the papers identifying the industrial accident insurance medical institution that treated that worker, any correspondence from the Corporation asking for reports or documents, and the record showing the procedure the Presidential Decree prescribes was followed.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading holds that the Corporation may act where it recognises the need for insurance benefits, and, under the procedure set by Presidential Decree, may require the institution that treated a worker receiving insurance benefits to report on that treatment or submit documents or things about it, may have its own staff question related persons, and may have staff examine related documents or things; the institution is read to include doctors.
Another reading notes that the reporting and submission limbs are tied expressly to the worker's treatment, while the questioning and examination limbs speak only of 'related persons' and 'related documents or things', and for these investigations the provision applies, by mutatis mutandis reference, a rule set elsewhere in the same Act whose content is not stated in the text quoted here.
Your judgment
When the file names persons who are neither the treating clinic nor its staff, how could it be settled whether they are related persons the Corporation may question?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We revisit this card if the provision is amended to widen or narrow the class of institutions or persons it reaches, or if a court decision explains how far the mutatis mutandis rule governs compliance with these demands.