Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In common law jurisdictions, medical malpractice liability is normally based on the tort of negligence. [3]Although the law of medical malpractice differs significantly between nations, as a broad general rule liability follows when a health care practitioner does not show a fair, reasonable and competent degree of skill when providing medical care to a patient. [3]
Under Article 3 of the proposed Rome II Regulation on the Law Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations (22 July 2003), there would be a general presumption that the lex loci delicti will apply subject to either: an exception in Paragraph 2 for the application of the law to any common habitual residence between the parties, or an exception in ...
For example, a nursing home is responsible for death from adverse effects from a medication even if the physician who prescribed the medication also had a nondelegable duty of care. [24] Additionally, the doctrine of strict liability means that, in some cases, independent contractors are not immune from claims of negligence even if some other ...
Res ipsa loquitur (Latin: "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine in common law and Roman-Dutch law jurisdictions under which a court can infer negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved in the context of tort litigation.
In John Rylands and Jehu Horrocks v Thomas Fletcher (1868) House of Lords L.R. 3 H.L. 330, the judgment of Lord Cairns and Lord Cranworth stated: [4] Where the owner of land, without wilfulness or negligence, uses his land in the ordinary manner of its use, though mischief should thereby be occasioned to his neighbour, he will not be liable in ...
The only difficulty lies in the way McGhee was explained in Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1988] AC 1074. The latter was not a case in which the five factors were present. It was an action for clinical negligence in which it was alleged that giving a premature baby excessive oxygen had caused retrolental fibroplasia, resulting in blindness.
Gross negligence is the "lack of slight diligence or care" or "a conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard of a legal duty and of the consequences to another party." [1] In some jurisdictions a person injured as a result of gross negligence may be able to recover punitive damages from the person who caused the injury or loss. [2]
In 2012 the US Justice Department fined GlaxoSmithKline $3 billion for several violations, including withholding data on paroxetine, unlawfully promoting it for adolescents, and preparing a misleading article about study 329. New Scientist wrote in 2015: "You may never have heard of it, but Study 329 changed medicine." [28]