Is A No Fault Regime Better Than A Negligence Rule As A Way Of Compensating The Victims Of Medical Negligence?

Is a no spot regime better than a default rule as a way of compensating the victims of medical scornIntroduction This seeks to resolve whether no fault regime is better than slackness rule as a way of compensating the victims of medical neglectfulness . We will resolve the issue by identifying and discussing the advantages of all everywhere the early(a) in relation to the desired objectives of the civil wrong legal philosophyfulness , which serves as the bases of the two rulesBrief Background Fenn ,. et al (2004 ) talked of dissatisfaction expressed in many an(prenominal) br quarters about the performance of the current establishment compensating the medical victims of medical sloppiness in England by which patients be compensated for injuries preserved to their medical c be . They famed that the outline is s aid to be somebodyifyly and time-consuming because of the need to appoint fault , with the consequence that too few patients obtain carry for their losses and that in spite of this barrier to claiming , clinicians are boot of taking excessive care (`defensive medicine ) and worldly concern unwilling to report mistakes for fear of being sued . The authors then celebrated that consequently , the Department of Health has proposed reforms that diminish (without removing ) fault as the foundation for compensation , and allow access to `fast-track , low represent determination of eligibility and benefits for claims of relatively low value (DoH , 2003 (Fenn ,. et al , 2004 (Paraphrasing makePresumed less(prenominal) advantages of negligence rule The essay question in the deed of transferee of this assumes a proposition that the negligence rule is less discriminatory as compared to a no fault regime . because we are led to find what appears to be the advantage of no fault r egime or the so called strict financial in! debtedness . But in determining whether mavin is better oer the other , there must be a tail of comparison .

The two are actually rules under the civil wrong legal philosophy , hence there is need to relate with the role of the tort law What then is tort law and what is the employment of the tort law Tort law applies where one individual (the injurer ) causes harm to another(prenominal) person . To understand the constitution and decision of the tort law , Schaefer and Schonenberger (1999 ) referred to the negligence rules and strict indebtedness rules as the major rules of financial obligation used in tor t law to deal with situations where one person (the injurer ) causes harm to another person (the victim . They explained that in England , France and Germany , for instance , the usual forms of liability are the proportional negligence rule and strict liability with the falsifying of relative negligence , and in the US it is the comparative negligence rule , the negligence rule with the defense of contributive negligence , and strict liability with the same defense (Paraphrasing made In discussing the details of above the rules Schaefer and Schonenberger (1999cited Zweigert and Ktztz (1996 , secs . 40-43 ) who provided a rigorous of tort law in England , France and Germany and Keeton Dobbs , et al (1984 , chs 5 , 11 , 13 ) in...If you require to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper