The consequences that one suffers from complications, related to medical treatment can, in many cases affect one’s life or the life of those closest to that person. Because of that legal regimes around the world predict ways to compensate for the damage that an individual suffers after being included in medical treatment. Most countries, amongst them Slovenia, are known for so called classical compensations system, essential characteristic of which is to determine the guilt of the one, that caused the damage. That kind of system can present a huge burden for the injured party, whose position is already weakened because of the caused damage. In the long run that leads to many issues, that negatively affect the position of patients, as well as decisions, that health-care workers make in the process of medical treatments. Because of that initiatives for introduction of a different system are getting louder. Many see the solution in the no-fault compensation schemes, that some countries already adopted. But because no system, even no-fault compensation schemes, is without mistakes, the key questions that presents itself is, which regime is the best for an individual country, given its legal regime.
Thesis present fundamental characteristics of no-fault compensation schemes, including pros and cons emphasised by theory and case-law, and the review of individual countries, that already know this schemes. In the light of initiatives for change and important case-law progress, the last part of thesis is focused on Slovenian legal regime of liability in health-care. In the final part I try to determine, if the addressed institute can represent a good solution for improving currently quite problematic legal regime of liability in health-care in Slovenia.
|
