...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of women’s health >Study of Environment Lifestyle and Fibroids (SELF): Advancing the Field of Fibroid Epidemiology.
【24h】

Study of Environment Lifestyle and Fibroids (SELF): Advancing the Field of Fibroid Epidemiology.

机译：研究环境生活方式和肌瘤（SELF）：推进肌瘤流行病学领域。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article arose from the back-to-back presentations by Michael Kelly and Patrice Métayer to the Anglo-French Medical Society in 2013 on the French and English legal systems handling a case of alleged clinical negligence as it proceeds from complaint to settlement or judgment in the two jurisdictions. Both systems have a hospital-based first stage with various avenues being available for amicable resolution, the French version being more regulated and prescribed than the English one. In both jurisdictions fewer than 5% cases go down the criminal route. Before the court is involved, in England there is an elaborate lawyer-controlled phase involving negotiations between the two sides and their experts which is expensive but often leads to pre-trial settlement for significant sums of money. Medical experts are central to all of this. In England they are largely unregulated and entirely advisory in an open market, in France they are both regulated and supervised by judges, being placed on official lists. These experts take a major inquisitorial role in a Debate between the two sides, combining the functions of Single Joint Expert (SJE), arbiter and mentor. If agreement is not reached, a second Debate before a different Expert is arranged. In both countries fewer than 5% cases reach a court for a hearing before a judge. In England a trial is an elaborate lengthy, expensive adversarial contest where all of the issues are rehearsed in full with factual and expert evidence, whereas in France in a contested case the judge reviews the reports of the two Debates with the lawyers who were involved (and not the experts, factual witnesses or parties).
机译：本文源于Michael Kelly和PatriceMétayer在2013年对法国和英国法律体系的背对背演讲，内容涉及处理涉嫌临床疏忽一事的法国和英语法律体系，因为该过程从投诉到解决或判决都在进行中。这两个司法管辖区。两种系统都有一个以医院为基础的第一阶段，有各种途径可用于友好解决，法语版本比英语版本更具规范性和规定性。在两个司法管辖区，只有不到5％的案件属于犯罪途径。在法院介入之前，在英格兰，有一个复杂的律师控制阶段，涉及到双方及其专家之间的谈判，这是昂贵的，但通常会导致大笔款项的审前和解。医学专家对此至关重要。在英格兰，他们基本上不受监管，完全在公开市场上提供咨询服务;在法国，他们既受法官监管，又被法官列入正式名单。这些专家在双方之间的辩论中扮演主要的咨询角色，结合了单人联合专家（SJE），仲裁员和指导者的职能。如果未达成协议，则在安排另一位专家之前进行第二次辩论。在这两个国家中，只有不到5％的案件在法院进行审理。在英格兰，审判是一场精心策划的冗长，昂贵的对抗性竞赛，在该竞赛中所有事实均经过事实和专家证据的充分排练，而在法国，在一项有争议的案件中，法官与所涉及的律师共同审查了两个辩论的报告（而不是专家，事实证人或当事方）。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号