The liability within the operating team Sample Clauses

The liability within the operating team. The accomplishment of a surgical operation with a robot may require the cooperation of a medical team comprised of more than one surgeon. In this respect, careful consideration should be devoted to the problem of shared liability. Civil liability rules generally concerning the responsibility of all the surgeons in the team, do not perfectly suit malpractice cases involving surgical robots, where the surgeon operating the console makes a mistake during the intervention. Normally, in the case of medical malpractice, all the members of the surgical team are jointly responsible, because everyone is bound to act with diligence as much as to diligently supervise the work of the other, and if necessary to remedy evident errors. Despite this joint responsibility, the part of liability of each surgeon can be different, depending on who in actual fact has made a certain decision or has carried out the harmful act on the patient’s health. This state of things is coherent with a dating tradition of civil law. The article 2055 of Italian civil code states that if the tort is imputable to more than one person, everyone is jointly liable to compensate damage; § 830 I S. 1 BGB, analogously, says that if more than one person has caused damage by a jointly committed tort, then each of them is responsible for the damage. The same principle is not formally established in the French civil code, but nevertheless it has been affirmed by scholars and the law in action (‘la conséquence naturelle de la pluralité de responsables est l’obligation in solidum, également dénommée obligation solidaire’: Corgas-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇: 5; and Cour d’▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇ février 2002). A similar statement, which contains also a punitive value (because someone in the first instance could be bound to compensate the full damage although his role in the causation of it was only marginal) (Medicus & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2010, 495, say that the § 830 presents a ‘“strafrechtliche” Teil’), seems particularly iniquitous and irrational if applied without discrimination to the liability of the entire surgical team involved in a robotic-assisted operation, because in robotic-assisted interventions the position of individual operators cannot be considered on the same level. In fact, only the surgeon who sits at the master console can command the robot and, more specifically, only this subject takes advantage of the 3D display above his hands, giving him the virtual sensation of acting within the patient’s body, while the rest of th...
View SourceView Similar (2)

Related to The liability within the operating team

  • Indemnification for Expenses of a Party Who is Wholly or Partly Successful Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement except for Section 27, to the extent that Indemnitee was or is, by reason of Indemnitee’s Corporate Status, a party to (or a participant in) and is successful, on the merits or otherwise, in any Proceeding or in defense of any claim, issue or matter therein, in whole or in part, the Company shall, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, indemnify, hold harmless and exonerate Indemnitee against all Expenses actually and reasonably incurred by him or her in connection therewith. If Indemnitee is not wholly successful in such Proceeding but is successful, on the merits or otherwise, as to one or more but less than all claims, issues or matters in such Proceeding, the Company shall, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, indemnify, hold harmless and exonerate Indemnitee against all Expenses actually and reasonably incurred by him or her or on his or her behalf in connection with each successfully resolved claim, issue or matter. If Indemnitee is not wholly successful in such Proceeding, the Company also shall, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, indemnify, hold harmless and exonerate Indemnitee against all Expenses reasonably incurred in connection with a claim, issue or matter related to any claim, issue, or matter on which Indemnitee was successful. For purposes of this Section and without limitation, the termination of any claim, issue or matter in such a Proceeding by dismissal, with or without prejudice, shall be deemed to be a successful result as to such claim, issue or matter.

  • Disputes between a Contracting Party and an Investor (1) Any dispute which may arise between an investor of one Contracting Party and the other Contracting Party in connection with an investment on the territory of that other Contracting Party shall be subject to negotiations between the parties in dispute. (2) If any dispute between an investor of one Contracting Party and the other Contracting Party continues to exist after a period of three months, investor shall be entitled to submit the case either to: (a) The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes having regard to the applicable provisions of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States opened for signature at Washington D.C. on 18 March 1965, or in case both Contracting Parties have not become parties to this Convention, (b) An arbitrator or international ad hoc arb1 tral tribunal established under the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. The parties to the dispute may agree in writing to modify these Rules. The arbitral awards shall be final and binding on both Parties to the dispute.Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. The parties to the dispute may agree in writing to modify these Rules. The arbitral awards shall be final and binding on both Parties to the dispute.

  • Indemnification for Expenses of an Indemnitee Who is Wholly or Partially Successful Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, and without limiting any such provision, to the extent that Indemnitee was or is, by reason of Indemnitee’s Corporate Status, made a party to (or otherwise becomes a participant in) any Proceeding and is successful, on the merits or otherwise, in the defense of such Proceeding, the Company shall indemnify Indemnitee for all Expenses actually and reasonably incurred by Indemnitee or on Indemnitee’s behalf in connection therewith. If Indemnitee is not wholly successful in such Proceeding but is successful, on the merits or otherwise, as to one or more but less than all claims, issues or matters in such Proceeding, the Company shall indemnify Indemnitee under this Section 7 for all Expenses actually and reasonably incurred by Indemnitee or on Indemnitee’s behalf in connection with each such claim, issue or matter, allocated on a reasonable and proportionate basis. For purposes of this Section 7 and, without limitation, the termination of any claim, issue or matter in such a Proceeding by dismissal, with or without prejudice, shall be deemed to be a successful result as to such claim, issue or matter.

  • Products and Completed Operations Personal Injury Liability Contractual Liability The policy shall be on an occurrence form and limits shall not be less than: $1,000,000 Each Occurrence $2,000,000 General Aggregate $1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000 Personal & Advertising Injury

  • Disputes Not Related to Contract Services The Engineer shall be responsible for the settlement of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of any procurement made by the Engineer in support of the services authorized herein.