A double-edged weapon or commission forensic examination in civil trial on medical cases

BACKGROUND: A commission forensic medical examination is crucial for examining medical cases, and its conclusion is of fundamental importance to the court. However, experts often do not use their rights to the fullest extent, limiting themselves to the study of medical documentation. Such an approach negatively affects the quality of concrete conclusions, which is associated with legal risk in criminal and civil proceedings.

CASE PRESENTATION: This review is devoted to a case report on moral damage compensation recovery from the hospital to the relatives of patient A., who died during medical care. A commission forensic medical examination could not establish death causation, citing inadequate medical documentation. The commission made no attempts to gather additional information on the case. The victims sued the two hospitals for a total of 2,500,000 rubles. The court of first instance dismissed the lawsuit, finding the defendants’ guilt unproven. The appellate court reversed this decision and indicated that the defendants must themselves prove their innocence; however, neither the available documentation nor the expert opinion was allowed to do this. The court ordered the defendants to pay 1,600,000 rubles.

CONCLUSION: A commission forensic medical examination opinion must serve as evidence in the case. However, the court can interpret a formal approach to its performance against the defendants, sometimes even in cases where the medical care was potentially accurate and under accepted standards and recommendations.