Search Results
Search Results
-
FUNDAMENTALS OF GERMAN MEDICAL LIABILITY LAW IN THE FIELD OF AESTHETIC SURGERY
The German medical liability law makes a distinction between the responsibility for treatment mistakes and responsibility for lack of information. Interventions in aesthetic surgery is, as a rule, a medical practice when the physician is below the standard in force in the respective special field of aesthetic plastic surgery. However, in the case of lack of information liability (tort) is based on bodily injury, according to the jurisdiction of German courts is inherent in any medical intervention in body or health status of the patient. However, bodily injury is not considered unlawful if the patient, after having been duly informed, has given valid consent (informed consent). Informed consent, which the treating party should give evidence at trial, can justify the bodily injury. In the aesthetic operations it is of practical importance, above all, the responsibility for insufficient information on the risks of the respective intervention. If aesthetic surgery, as no medical indication occurs often, the requirements for patient information are particularly stringent. In this sense, the jurisdiction requires a extensive, intense and sometimes “thoughtless” information about imminent risks, in the case of offset to some extent the purely “aesthetic indication” by the qualified patient consent after extensive information (intensely informed consent ). If it is found that the information was insufficient, doctors and hospitals may be liable for damages and ordered to pay compensation for personal injury.
-
DUTY TO SAFEGUARD RELEVANT INFORMATION IN THE PRE-CONTRACTUAL STAGE
The duty to provide information at the pre-contractual stage has not been the subject of much debate at present. However, it is worth mentioning that neither doctrine nor case law has sufficiently considered whether such data deserves any duty of care under common law. The purpose of this commentary on case law is to study the existing legal protection of this delivery of information in the pre-contractual stage and, specifically, the construction of the duty of care that protects certain assets. For this purpose, we will analyze the judgment in question, in which the use of information provided in the pre-contractual stage for the execution of a project in which the party that provided such data is not a party is alleged, and then characterize what type of information assets enjoy this special duty according to the criteria delimited by the Supreme Court in the sublite case.
-
Related parties’ credits included in a mercantile current account and faithfulness of financial statements. Comment of the Supreme Court’s judgement of July 31, 2020, N. 29.982-2019
The paper analyzes a Supreme Court’s judgement which confirmed, with a reduction, the fines imposed on managers of a public corporation by the former SVS. The firm reported in the financial statements some long-term credits, which debtors where related companies. It did not take steps to collect them in a considerable period of time, on the grounds that they had been included into a mercantile current account with few movements. The supervisor reclassified the credits as long-term, and concluded that the financial statements contained false information. An analysis validates critically this judicial decision, and offers an alternative basis for it, built on the content of the commercial current account contract.
-
BETWEEN CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLOSURE. THE CONTOURS OF THE DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF A PUBLIC COMPANY RELATING TO INFORMATION ABOUT BUSINESS ACQUISITION TRANSACTIONS
This article examines the confidentiality and disclosure duties imposed on directors of publicly traded companies in the context of negotiations to acquire a target. It analyzes how directors must balance their obligation of confidentiality, rooted in the need to prioritize the corporate best interest, with mandatory disclosure rules, founded on the general interest in the proper functioning of the securities market. This article argues that, while the rule is to maintain confidentiality to protect the shareholders’ interests, there are exceptions requiring disclosure of certain events in contexts where safeguarding the securities market outweighs the general protection of corporate interests guiding the directors’ decisions. Additionally, the counter exceptions of “confidential information” arise in situations involving significant risks to corporate interests, thus returning to the general rule of confidentiality.
-
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENTS IN CHILE. ECONOMIC AND JURISPRUDENCE ANALYSIS
Construction agreements, and especially those of lump sum, are designed not only to transfer the price risk from the principal to the contractor, which is the party that is in the best position to evaluate and control said risk, but for eliminating or mitigating the problems that arise from the information asymmetry between the contracting parties, including the phenomena known as adverse selection and moral hazard. If these phenomena are effectively controlled, it can be concluded that this type of contract will tend to promote market efficiency, reduce transaction costs and maximize the so-called social surpluses of cooperation. The measure in which these contractual designs ultimately reach their objectives depends on the value that, in reality, the jurisprudence attributes to them. Analyzing the recent jurisprudence of the Chilean high courts of justice, it can be concluded that, in general, judges tend to respect these contractual mechanisms. -
ABOUT THE ARTICULATION BETWEEN THE LEGAL GUARANTEE AND THE VOLUNTARY GUARANTEE IN THE CHILEAN CONSUMER LAW: CONCURRENT TERM AND RESIDUAL TERM
The deficient legislative technique used by the LPDC to regulate the conformity guarantee regimes, has implied the emergence of various interpretative doubts, among which is the eventual extension of the term of the legal guarantee –and its effects– to all temporary effectiveness of a possible voluntary guarantee.
A systematic reading of the LPDC and its liability statutes lead to a negative response, supported on the basis of its internal rationality and the interpretation of the rules of guarantees, in line with those that establish duties of information and publicity.