Post by account_disabled on Jan 23, 2024 7:36:16 GMT
Treatment and the patient's emotional state after the diagnostic error. “The causal link between the defect in the provision of service and the moral and material damages caused to the appellant, when she was subjected, at the age of 55, to unnecessary surgery, with mutilation of a part so representative of her femininity, is established. in addition to the profound changes in her state of mind due to having dealt with the apparent possibility of being affected by such a serious illness, which, of course, affected her personality rights”, he declared.
Strict liability According to the records, the Buy Phone Number List university hospital claimed that it only had a space assignment contract with the laboratory and, therefore, would not be responsible for diagnostic errors. The patient, however, argued that the contract also included the provision, by the laboratory, of pathological anatomy services for the hospital. The rapporteur said, in his vote, that the interpretation given by ordinary bodies should be accepted in the sense that there is a relationship of subordination between the laboratory and the hospital.
Bellizze also defended that the hospital be jointly and severally liable for the service provided by the laboratory: “Considering that the responsibility of legal entities providing medical-hospital services is of an objective nature, there is no way to exclude, under the terms of the caput of article 14 of the CDC, the responsibility solidarity with the hospital for the poor provision of the service provided by the laboratory subordinate to it”. Subjective responsibility In the understanding of the 3rd Panel, the doctor's responsibility “is subjective in nature, thus depending on the occurrence of lato sensu fault of the professional considered to have caused the damage”, explained the minister.
Strict liability According to the records, the Buy Phone Number List university hospital claimed that it only had a space assignment contract with the laboratory and, therefore, would not be responsible for diagnostic errors. The patient, however, argued that the contract also included the provision, by the laboratory, of pathological anatomy services for the hospital. The rapporteur said, in his vote, that the interpretation given by ordinary bodies should be accepted in the sense that there is a relationship of subordination between the laboratory and the hospital.
Bellizze also defended that the hospital be jointly and severally liable for the service provided by the laboratory: “Considering that the responsibility of legal entities providing medical-hospital services is of an objective nature, there is no way to exclude, under the terms of the caput of article 14 of the CDC, the responsibility solidarity with the hospital for the poor provision of the service provided by the laboratory subordinate to it”. Subjective responsibility In the understanding of the 3rd Panel, the doctor's responsibility “is subjective in nature, thus depending on the occurrence of lato sensu fault of the professional considered to have caused the damage”, explained the minister.