The Commission finds that the respondent should indemnify MSH for the damages sustained due to the inaccurate and false information found in her previous TORs.
Based on Section 11(c) of the DPA, and Section 19(d) of the IRR of the DPA, the respondent, being a PIC, had the obligation to ensure that MSH’s personal information was accurate and up to date. Yet, the fact that TCC separately issued two (2) inaccurate TORs reveals a clear lapse in ensuring diligent compliance with the DPA.
Section 16(f) of the DPA allows for indemnification in favor of the data subject when it is shown that there were damages sustained, and the cause of the injury was due to “inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, false, unlawfully obtained or unauthorized use of personal information.” The Commission finds that damages were sustained by MSH, despite TCC’s subsequent rectification of the inaccurate personal information.
As to the type and amount of damages to be awarded, it is appropriate to award MSH nominal damages. The award for nominal damages is proper when “a legal right is technically violated and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any kind or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown.”
The issuance of the incorrect TORs affected MSH’s employment, and led to her employer conducting background checks on her credentials. Worse, it concluded that her credentials were fake. This would have all been avoided if TCC was zealous in ensuring data quality. It committed lapses in this obligation by issuing two incorrect TORs.
The Commission ORDERS Respondent, TCC, to: INDEMNIFY the Complainant, MSH, in the amount of ten thousand pesos (Php 10,000.00) for the damages sustained due to Respondent’s issuance of inaccurate and false information, pursuant to Section 16(f) of the Data Privacy Act of 2012