title: [Urology facing the courts. The basis of professional responsibility].
abstract: The liability of the urologist can be involved according to 3 procedures: The civil procedure is that of the Tribunal de Grande Instance (High Court) then the Cour d'Appel (Court of Appeal). Financial compensations are claimed from the surgeon for not respecting the medical contact. This contract is tacit, oral and carries obligations for the surgeon. The administrative procedure is that of the Tribunal Administratif (Administrative Court) then the Conseil d'Etat (Council of State). This only concerns the salaried surgeon in his salaried activities. The penal procedure is that of the Tribunal Correctionnel (Criminal Court) then the Cour d'Appel (Court of Appeal). The surgeon is then charged with a crime, usually unintensional injuries or through negligence. Although the harlm is easy to prove, the reality of the fault of the surgeon and the relation between fault and damage are far less so. It is the plaintiff (Civil Course, Administrative Cours) or the State Prosecutor (Penal Course) who must prove the fault and causality by the help of an expert's report. So, the responsibility of the surgeon can be committed. However, the development of the insurance system has allowed more widespread compensation without any fault found on the surgeon's part and increasingly frequent conciliatory procedures.
authors.affiliation: Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris.
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Haertig
authors.forename: O
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Haillot
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Chopin
mesh_terms: D005602:France; D005607:Fraud; D006801:Humans; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014570:Urologic Diseases / Q000601:surgery*
vernacular_title: L'urologue face aux tribunaux. Fondements de la responsabilité professionnelle.