In line with the main approach of other legal institutions for maintaining public discipline, the philosophy of civil liability is also based on compensation and providing the maximum possibility of restoring the situation to the previous state before the loss and final More
In line with the main approach of other legal institutions for maintaining public discipline, the philosophy of civil liability is also based on compensation and providing the maximum possibility of restoring the situation to the previous state before the loss and finally achieving the lost discipline. Meeting the mentioned philosophy, the importance of causality relationship has been less considered from the beginning so that it has been thought that proving no fault will remove the defendant’s liability. The difficulty of proving fault caused by the multitude of unknowns in physician’s civil liability claims and lack of familiarity of plaintiff with medical subtleties- as expected - has caused the discussions to focus on the fault and neglect the element of causality relationship. Therefore, this focus has increased the rejected lawsuits of physician’s civil liability and has disturbed the philosophy of physician’s civil liability. The fact is that in the area of the discussed liability, fault is not the only possibility of authentication of causality relationship and it is possible for the physician to be recognized as liable even without committing the fault because of special nature of medicine. It is available in the juridical records and legal texts.This research is theoretical and research methodology is descriptive and analytical and data collection method is library research by referring to the documents, books and papers.
Manuscript profile
