Public hospital liability
PUBLIC HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITY
A doctor practicing within a public hospital is not personally liable for harm caused to a patient due to their fault.
Indeed, the doctor acts as a public service agent, and the patient is considered a user of a public service. As such, only the public healthcare institution can be held liable.
If, however, the doctor commits a personal fault separate from their official duties, then civil liability may apply — but only in such cases.
A personal fault separate from official duties is defined by case law as a particularly serious fault that cannot reasonably be attributed to the normal functioning of the public service. This includes, for example, a fault committed with intent to harm, for personal gain, or a blatant breach of professional ethics.
Since the law of March 4, 2002, the administrative liability of public healthcare institutions can be invoked under Article L1142-1 of the Public Health Code, just like the liability of private healthcare professionals and institutions. Therefore, apart from the exceptional cases provided for in Article L1142-1, the administrative liability of a public healthcare institution can only be established if the patient provides proof of a fault, a damage, and a causal link between the two.
A medical expert assessment will be required to establish this fault. In principle, no judge will rule on medical liability without first obtaining the informed opinion of a qualified medical expert.
The competent courts for handling administrative liability of public healthcare institutions are:
• the Administrative Court at first instance,
• the Administrative Court of Appeal,
• and, if necessary, the Council of State (Conseil d’État).
PUBLIC HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITY
PUBLIC HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITY
A doctor practicing within a public hospital is not personally liable for harm caused to a patient due to their own fault.
Indeed, the doctor acts as a public service agent, while the patient is considered a public service user. Therefore, only the liability of the public healthcare institution can be engaged.
However, if the doctor commits what is known as a personal fault separable from their duties, they may then incur personal civil liability—but only under those specific circumstances.
A personal fault separable from official duties is defined by case law as a particularly serious fault that cannot reasonably be attributed to the functioning of the public service. Examples include misconduct committed with intent to harm, for personal gain, or a fault that is inexcusable under professional ethics.
Since the law of March 4, 2002, the administrative liability of public healthcare institutions may be invoked under Article L1142-1 of the Public Health Code, just like the liability of private professionals and institutions. Therefore, except in the exceptional cases mentioned in Article L1142-1, the administrative liability of a public healthcare institution can only be engaged if the patient proves the existence of a fault, a damage, and a causal link between the two.
A medical expert assessment will be required to establish such fault. In principle, no judge will rule on medical liability without first obtaining the opinion of a qualified expert.
The competent courts for hearing administrative liability cases involving public healthcare institutions are:
• the Administrative Court (first instance),
• the Administrative Court of Appeal,
• and, if necessary, the Council of State (Conseil d’État).
Public hospital liability
PUBLIC HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITY
A doctor practicing within a public hospital is not personally liable for harm caused to a patient due to their own fault.
Indeed, the doctor acts as a public service agent, and the patient is considered a user of a public service. As a result, only the public institution’s liability may be engaged.
However, when the doctor commits what is known as a personal fault separable from their duties, they may then incur civil liability, but only in such cases.
Case law defines a personal fault separable from official duties as a particularly serious fault that cannot reasonably be attributed to the normal functioning of the service. This includes, for instance, a fault committed with intent to harm, for personal interest, or one that is inexcusable under professional ethics.
Since the law of March 4, 2002, the administrative liability of public healthcare institutions may be engaged under Article L1142-1 of the French Public Health Code, just like the liability of private professionals and institutions. Outside of exceptional circumstances provided for in Article L1142-1, the administrative liability of a public healthcare institution can only be established if the patient proves the existence of a fault, a damage, and a causal link between the two.
A medical expert assessment is required to demonstrate this fault. In principle, no judge will rule on medical liability without first obtaining the informed opinion of a qualified expert in the field.
The courts competent to hear cases involving the administrative liability of public healthcare institutions are:
• the Administrative Court at first instance,
• the Administrative Court of Appeal on appeal,
• and, if applicable, the Council of State (Conseil d’État).
What to do and how to proceed in the event of a medical error?
What to do in the event of a medical error?
You’ve just been the victim of a medical accident that caused serious harm. Naturally, you’re asking yourself: Was it truly a medical error? What should I do? How should I proceed?
Dealing with a medical error and obtaining compensation for the resulting damages are highly complex processes. To be properly handled, they require the support of professionals — even in procedures where legal representation is not mandatory, such as those before the CCI (Commission for Conciliation and Compensation).
Every day, we receive requests from victims who contact us after already taking steps on their own or with professionals who are not specialized. Unfortunately, by the time they come to our firm, it is often too late to reverse the situation or obtain fair compensation.
Phase 1: Studying the file
Our firm offers a free review of your case to help you understand, before initiating any action, what your chances of success are.
This review requires expertise in two highly specialized fields: medical and legal.
We work in close collaboration with medical consultants who are exclusively dedicated to defending victims, allowing us to conduct a thorough initial assessment of your case and provide a clear forecast of your chances of success.
This process requires obtaining your complete medical records beforehand. The firm can also assist you in obtaining these documents.
At the end of this review, following a phone or video consultation, we will inform you whether we can take on your case, outline the proposed legal procedure, and provide the exact amount of the legal fees.
Phase 2: The expert assessment
The expertise is the most crucial phase of the process. If the expertise fails, there is a 99% chance that the process will fail as well.
Moreover, the expertise meeting can be a painful moment during which you must recount the events and describe your injuries in front of the experts, the opposing parties, and their representatives. It is essential to be assisted by someone who is empathetic and, most importantly, competent and trustworthy.
Indeed, during the expertise meeting, the expert will give their opinion on the medical management and evaluate your injuries. To do so, they will use medico-legal terms that require expertise in the field. If you do not understand these terms, you will not be able to defend yourself. Furthermore, you will not know if the expert has properly evaluated your injuries or if they missed any details.
What you must absolutely know is that this report will serve as the basis for calculating your compensation, and that the health professional’s insurer, ONIAM, or, in case of disagreement, the Judge, will follow the conclusions of the report in 99% of cases. If key elements are missing because you were not properly assisted during the expertise, it will be very difficult to recover. Obtaining a new expertise is also very difficult.
That’s why it is imperative to have proper assistance during the expertise meeting, whether it is an expertise ordered by the CCI or a judicial expertise. You must trust the person who will assist you and have prepared the expertise in advance with them.
Our firm places great importance on ensuring that our clients are assisted during the expertise meeting. We provide assistance either by a lawyer, a specialized medical advisor (exclusively representing victims to avoid any conflict of interest), or both, depending on what suits your case.
Before the expertise, we set up a preparation meeting (most often via videoconference) during which we will discuss the case strategy and explain how the expertise will unfold. This meeting is held with your medical advisor, if applicable.
Phase 3: Compensation
Once the expert has submitted their report, it will serve as the foundation for the compensation claim.
Our firm will handle the calculation of the optimal compensation, carefully identifying and justifying each type of damage based on the documents you provide at our request.
If additional professionals are needed to support your case (e.g., occupational therapist, accountant, etc.), we will guide you and connect you with the appropriate experts.
Compensation may be obtained amicably, if a fair amount is agreed upon with the opposing party. If no agreement is reached, the claim will be brought before the court.
In all cases, we will do everything possible to secure the best compensation for you.