23 not, however, prevent the file from being released to direct next of kin or responsible third parties who can prove that they hold a legitimate interest therein, subject to the relevant regulations.57 68. In general, the relevance of a properly integrated medical file is evident as the guiding instrument for medical treatment and a reasonable source of knowledge regarding the patient’s situation, the steps taken to control it and, as the case may be, to establish the resulting responsibility. The lack of a file or the existence of a poorly integrated one, as well as the lack of regulations governing this topic subject to the rules of ethic and best practices, is an omission that needs to be analyzed and assessed, in the light of its consequences, to establish potential liabilities of different nature. 69. With regard to the arguments submitted by the Commission and the representatives to the effect that the Eighth Civil Court failed to notify the victims that it had already received the medical file, the Court notes that there is no evidence in the proceeding to establish whether the civil judge did give notice of receipt thereof. Nevertheless, there is evidence that the Eighth Civil Court ordered the Metropolitan Hospital to deliver the original medical file to the Court. Such order was issued on November 6, 1990, the very same day on which it was requested (supra para. 65). The documents were produced ten days later (supra para. 65). The above proves that the judge acted in a diligent manner and that Laura Albán’s parents obtained timely access to the medical file. 70. Moreover, the procedure for the production and acknowledgment of documents was not a step that would allow the authority administering justice, in this case the Eighth Court, to analyze the contents of the documents produced and, accordingly, assess their characteristics and gain knowledge of the possible commission of an unlawful act. 71. Based on the above considerations and taking account of the fact that the action taken by the State in connection with the procedure for the production and acknowledgement of documents was effective, the Court concludes that the State did not violate the rights enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention to the detriment of Carmen Cornejo de Albán and Bismarck CornejoSánchez, in connection with the facts related to that procedure. 2) Proceedings before the Honor Tribunal of the Pichincha Medical Association (Colegio Médico de Pichincha) 72. On November 25, 1993, Mrs. Cornejo de Albán filed a complaint for negligence in the fulfillment of the professional practice before the Honor Tribunal against Dr. Montenegro-López and “[…] all the persons, doctors, nurses and paramedics, whose names, last names and addresses [were] unknown to her and should be determined by the accused, Dr. Ramiro Montenegro[-López], as said regarding clinical information and documentation in Spain; and Article 5(3) of Rule 168-SSA1-1998 on Medical Records of Mexico. 57 See, Law No. 41/2002 of November 14, 2002, the basic act regulating patient autonomy and rights and obligations regarding clinical information and documentation in Spain, Article 18(4); rules on medical ethics; Law No. 23 of 1981, Colombia, Article 34; Chile’s Ethics Code, Article 30; and Peru’s General Health Act, Article 25; and Argentina’s Ethics Code, Article 72.