title: [Medicolegal responsibility].
abstract: It was from 1835 onwards that jurisprudence considered that the doctor was responsible for his acts and that he must answer to what he does. Yet it took the Mercier act of 20/5/1936 that specified that between the doctor and his client exists a true contract comprising, for the doctor, an undertaking if not obviously to cure the patient, then at least to not give non-specific care but conscientious and attentive care and, except in exceptional circumstances, to conform to the body of evidence of science. This contract is based on a relationship of confidence, and even an involuntary violation of this contractual obligation is sanctioned. A victim of a medical accident has recourse to several types of legal processes, be it a request for civil or administrative indemnity reparations (depending on the whether the damages were incurred in the private sector or in a hospital), or a criminal pursuit if the first objective is to punish the doctor. Two important laws have brought innovations with regards to medical accidents. The law of the 10th of July 2000 has allowed a de-penalisation, whereas the law of 4/3/2002 has allowed more equitable compensation of the therapeutic risk, thus preserving free choice for the victim to seek medical help in the private or the public sector.
authors.affiliation: Jlcardona@aol.com
authors.forename: Jacqueline
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Cardona
authors.forename: Anne-Laure
authors.initials: AL
authors.lastname: Cordier
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Malicier
mesh_terms: D005602:France; D006801:Humans; D016365:Liability, Legal; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D010819:Physician's Role; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations