Treatment error of a veterinarian

Also, when a veterinarian treats an animal, a gross maladministration capable of causing harm of the kind actually encountered regularly results in the reversal of the objective burden of proof on the causal link between the treatment error and the damage to health.

BGH JUDGMENT VI ZR 247 / 15 of 10. May 2016

BGB § 823 I Continue reading

Burden of proof for a breach of the obligation to inform a re-pregnancy

The burden of proof for a violation of the obligation to inform a re-pregnancy has the patient. It must therefore be certain that the reference to the failure rate has been omitted.

OLG Hamm 26 U 112 / 13 vom 17.06.2014 - Information on the possibility of pregnancy despite sterilization Continue reading

Liability for a partly fateful, partly caused by treatment error health damage on the occasion of a birth

The plaintiff suffered severe damage to his health in connection with his birth. Therefore, he claimed the treating gynecologist, the midwife, a pediatric nurse and the carrier of the document hospital for damages.

Im ersten Teil des Verfahrens erging zum Anspruchsgrund ein rechtskräftiges Grund- und Teilendurteil des Oberlandesgerichts. In diesem wurde festgestellt, dass die Beklagten als Gesamtschuldner verpflichtet sind, dem Kläger sämtliche Schäden zu ersetzen, die dem Kläger “anlässlich und aufgrund der Behandlung durch die Beklagten nach seiner Geburt” entstanden sind und noch entstehen werden. Im vorliegenden Verfahrensabschnitt ging es um die Höhe des dem Kläger zustehenden Schadensersatzes. Das Oberlandesgericht hat insoweit entschieden, dass sich aus dem vorangegangenen Grundurteil eine Bindungswirkung dahin ergebe, dass die Beklagten nur für die Schäden hafteten, die dem Kläger nach seiner Geburt entstanden seien. Insoweit sei der von den Beklagten verursachte Schadensanteil auf höchstens 20 % zu begrenzen. Continue reading

Single judge decision in medical liability cases does not constitute a violation of the statutory judge

a) According to § 538 para. 1 ZPO, the Appeals Tribunal must in principle gather the necessary evidence and decide on the case itself. Whether or not the proceedings in the first instance suffer from a material defect which exceptionally allows a remittal to the first instance court under Paragraph 538 2 No. 1 ZPO is to be judged solely on the basis of the substantive legal position of the court of first instance ,

b) If the business allocation plan does not provide for any special jurisdiction of a Civil Chamber according to § 348 para. 1 no. 2 e. ZPO, a decision by the single judge is not due to the fact that doctor-liability matters are in principle of the full staff have been a violation of the right to the statutory judge.

BGH JUDGMENT VI ZR 325 / 11 of 14. May 2013

XPO § 141 para 1, § 448, § 348 para. 1 letter e, § 538 para. 1, para. 2 sentence 1 no. 1, GC Art. 101 para. 1 sentence 2 Continue reading

Using an outsider's method in a follow-up treatment requires patient education by surgeons

The need for patient information from a surgeon about his or her intention to use an outsider method in a follow-up treatment that may become necessary due to the realization of a risk typically associated with initial surgery.

BGH, judgment of the 22. December 2010 - 3 StR 239 / 10 - LG Moenchengladbach
StGB § 223 para. 1, § 224 para. 1 Nr. 2, § 228 Continue reading

Prescription of birth defects in case of grossly negligent ignorance of the performance department of the insurance and non-information of the regress department

A presumption of limitation according to § 199 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 BGB setting in running grossly negligent ignorance is not given in cases of recourse, if the employees of the performance department of the insurance of the injured party in a division of labor no initiatives to investigate the damage unfold and therefore the claim the employees of the Regressab-Division did not become aware.
BGH, judgment of the 28. February 2012 - VI ZR 9 / 11 - KG Berlin
LG Berlin Continue reading

Obligation of the physician for the consequences of a second intervention by a post-doctor

Obligation of the physician to accept the consequences of a second intervention by a post-treatment physician, which is required because the pretreating physician has undergone a treatment error during the first intervention.

BGH, judgment of the 22. May 2012 - VI ZR 157 / 11 - OLG Munich
LG Munich I

BGB § 823 Abs. 1 F, § 249 Ba
Continue reading

Assignment of an unnecessary human blood test by an external laboratory doctor

If the attending physician commissions an external laboratory doctor on behalf of his private patient with a non-required human genetic blood test, the laboratory doctor is not entitled to any compensation against the patient.

If the attending physician commissions an external laboratory doctor in the name of his private patient with a human blood test, which is objectively not necessary for a medically necessary medical care within the meaning of § 1 para. 2 sentence 1 GOÄ, then the laboratory doctor will not be entitled to claim remuneration from the patient if the laboratory doctor fulfilled the assignment assigned to him without errors and on the basis of his knowledge had no reason to doubt the necessity of the examination.
BGH, judgment of the 14. January 2010 - III ZR 188 / 09 - Brandenburg OLG
LG Neuruppin

GOÄ § 1 para. 2 sentence 1 Continue reading

Inspection of the treatment documents by the trial lawyers in medical liability proceedings

The original documents filed by the parties pursuant to § 134 ZPO or by third parties pursuant to § 142 para. 1 ZPO are not part of the court records. A claim for access to the file or the issue of copies does not follow directly from § 299 ZPO. For documents that are directly from the court gem. § 142 ZPO be requested from third parties, there is a claim to the production of photocopies but both from the provisions of §§ 131, 133 ZPO and an analogous application of § 299 ZPO in compliance with the principle of legal hearing acc. Art. 103 para. 1 GG.

§ 299 ZPO does not expressly provide for a transmission of the case files to the representatives of the parties. However, the shipment may be made in due discretion if the files are expendable and the recipient is trustworthy. The decision must respect the principle of the right to be heard.

The same applies to the documents and documents filed by the parties or pursuant to § 142 ZPO if the person between whom and the court established the custody relationship agrees to a transmission of the files to the authorized representatives of the parties. Before the court refuses to send it, it must first ask the third party whether they agree to a transmission of the documents to the representatives of both parties.

Continue reading

G|translate Your license is inactive or expired, please subscribe again!