摘要
关于“损害”的界定,传统民法学上的三种理论即“利益说”、“组织说”和“事实说”各有其利弊,应当综合运用三者加以判断。关于“医疗损害”的界定,我国学者将“因果关系”的界定纳入其中,人为地导致了问题的复杂化,且与损害赔偿责任构成要件理论、对“损害”的界定以及相关立法对举证责任的规定相矛盾。“医疗损害”应当界定为“患者在接受医疗服务过程中所遭受的不利益的事实”。
Considering the existed theories in traditional civil law science ＂the theory of interest＂, ＂the theory of organization＂ and ＂the theory of fact＂ all have their own advantages and disadvantages, the definition of ＂injury＂ should be determined by comprehensively applying these theories. Concerning the definition of ＂medical injury＂, Chinese scholars take the definition of ＂casuality＂ into account, complicate this problem artificially and produce the contradictions between the definition and the theory of the important constructive conditions of the responsibility of compensation for injury, the definition of ＂injury＂ and the pertinent legislative provisions about the burden of producing evidence. ＂Medical injury＂ should be defined as ＂the fact of negative interest incurred during the course of accepting the medical service.＂
出处
《时代法学》
2006年第3期76-80,共5页
Presentday Law Science
关键词
损害
医疗损害
因果关系
构成要件
举证责任
injury
medical injury
casuality
the important constructive conditions
the burden of producing evidence
