Declared a health liability of the Ministry of Health
A few days ago we published a brief review of the Judgment 463/2016, of 06 July 2016, the High Court of Galicia, on an assumption of liability of Public Administration was overcome by malpractice in performing medical treatment.
As you will recall, in this article we mentioned the elements of liability of the Public Administration:
1) Antijuridicidad del daño sufrido.
2) Nexo de causalidad entre la actuación de la Administración y el daño producido.
3) Que dicho daño sea efectivo, economically assessable, and sufficiently individualized.
En este nuevo comentario traemos la Sentence 549/2016, of 07 July 2016, of the Division of Administrative Litigation of the High Court of Asturias, given in a course of oncological medical care.
The factual background were the following:
Ms.. Yolanda was diagnosed in date 03.06.2003 de carcinoma ductal infiltrante, positive for estrogen receptors and progesterone. The 21.07.2003 It was referred to surgical treatment consistent mastectomy, Adjuvant chemotherapy also pautándosele, but in any case you will be given hormone treatment, although since the first diagnosis the tumor appeared as hormonodependiente. The 14.06.2005 It is back to enter to place an expander, intervention suspended until 22.06.2005. The 28 .03.2006 said expander is replaced by a silicone prosthesis. In May 2006 They will detect new tumor nodules in the left breast, so the 18.09.2006 It is practiced tumorectia of these nodules. The 24 March 2008 is un le diagnostic endocervical polyp, and in January 2009 attended the emergency, where it is seen pleural effusions and tumor cells identical to breast cancer. The 20 September 2009 is diagnosed with skeletal metastasis, worsening their status in October 2011 without treatment from January 2012, died Dña. Yolanda's 14.03.2014.
Relatives of Ms.. Yolanda interpusieron reclamación de responsabilidad patrimonial contra la Consejería de Sanidad del Principado de Asturias en fecha 25.04.2014 for damages arising from abnormal health care received by Dña. Yolanda. After the period of 6 months set in Article 43 Law Legal Regime of Public Administrations and the Common Administrative Procedure to understand dismissed by negative administrative silence, interpusieron recurso contencioso-administrativo, that was solved with the statement that we are commenting. These were the positions of the parties:
On the one hand, relatives of Ms.. Yolanda alegaron que había existido negligencia omisiva por parte de la Administración Pública por no aplicar tratamiento hormonal al tumor, a pesar de dar signos positivos enhormonodependencia, because it had been delayed is a surgical interventions, and not to use alternative chemotherapy treatments.
On the other hand, la Administración Pública demandada defendió que la asistencia sanitaria se realizó de manera correcta y adecuada a la lexartis, because the treatment was applied at that time was considered suitable for the characteristics of the tumor.
The Lounge, after describing the elements that must be present for the declaration of liability of the Public Administration (antijuridicidad del daño, actual damage, effective and economically valuable, and is the result of normal or abnormal functioning of public services), recalls that, in cases of Public Administration responsibility for health care, the unlawful nature of the damage depends on whether the service was provided in accordance with the state of the art at that time. That way, the damage will be unlawful if the provision of public health care service not all consolidated techniques that could prevent such damage were applied.
Based on the above, and according to the Protocol of Asturias, which it envisaged the need for hormonal treatment in circumstances such as those presented by the case of Ms.. Yolanda this case, declara la responsabilidad patrimonial de la Administración Pública demandada, encrypting it in 50.000 € for all items.
En las reclamaciones de responsabilidad de la Administración por prestación de asistencia sanitaria, It is very important to know what the state of the art as this is what will determine whether the Administration acted with the utmost diligence (lexartis ad hoc) and, therefore, the unlawful nature of the damage.
Set as default language
Subscribe to receive a book PDF
Sígueme en Twitter
Articles and Popular Pages
- Taxation of the sale of shares
- The Supreme blesses the floor clauses in companies
- ¿Contract arras contract sale?
- Mortgage costs: Guide to the claim
- How to increase the share capital in a limited company?
- What is the supervening lack of the object of the process?
- Swaps and expiry: How to interpret the doctrine of the Supreme?
- Cláusula suelo en vivienda no habitual
- How long do I have to claim in commercial contracts?: The prescription