title: [Faulty implants: the court of appeal has ruled surgeon's responsibility].
abstract: It is in this atmosphere fuelled by the recent scandal of the PIP implants that the final court of appeal has given a judgment on July 12, 2012 which reorients the debate. While patients seeked a shared responsibility between the provider of the implants and the surgeon, in this case of faulty testicular implants, the final court of appeal just ruled out the responsibility of the surgeon. But this jurisprudence can only be applied to private law, i.e. for private healthcare whereas lawsuits filed against public hospitals depend on a different legal liability system.
authors: Département d'anesthésie-réanimation, centre hospitalier Princesse-Grace, boulevard Pasteur, Monaco. alexandretheissen@hotmail.com
authors: A
authors: A
authors: Theissen
authors: N
authors: N
authors: Pujol
authors: J
authors: J
authors: Catineau
authors: P
authors: P
authors: Niccolai
authors: M
authors: M
authors: Carles
mesh_terms: D035881:Compensation and Redress / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D005060:Europe; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D016365:Liability, Legal; D008297:Male; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D019919:Prosthesis Implantation; D020034:Silicone Gels; D013737:Testis / Q000601:surgery*
chemical_list: D020034:Silicone Gels
keywords: Cour de cassation; Defective prosthesis; Final court of appeal; Jurisprudence; Prosthesis PIP; Prothèse PIP; Prothèse défectueuse; Prothèse testiculaire; Responsabilité du chirurgien; Surgeon responsibility; Testicular prosthesis