Liability Claims Research Articles

Fair Law in Money Laundering with the Origin of Corruption with the Concept of Asset Seizure

Money laundering is a guarantee to get the results of criminal acts establish the economic responsibilities of a country and especially of tact currency exchange rates will be more difficult. Glassy from this, the achievement of assets becomes important because the method of approach used to be known as "following the money". The concept of Internal Revenue money from the perspective of Justice. This study is the norm or research doctrinaire, also referred to as dogmatic research with a conceptual approach and legislation. The study found that the achievement of assets in laundering money has actually been seized in Indonesia in the form of criminal forfeiture based on Criminal Code and code of Criminal Procedure, civil forfeiture and administrative forfeiture under the PPTPPU law, but in setting and implementation there is still a law that can used by criminals to return the proceeds of their crimes, so as not to get a sense of Justice, harming the state and society completely money kidnapping victim. Based on the perspective of Justice derived from the fundamental principle of Justice states that justice should not be contested the culprit. This underlies the need for consideration of regulatory responsibility foreclosure of assets, especially related to civil / in foreclosure rem by reformulating unity in the UU PPTPPU. In addition, liability claims can also be made through legislation that specifically addresses the achievement of assets with a train of thought that is not just limited to the assets in the account user creation service providers only, but includes all assets associated with evil. Maintaining health against certain infectious diseases is also good it needs to be organized to increase the sense of justice for society and the state.

Multivariate Zero-Inflated INAR(1) Model with an Application in Automobile Insurance

The objective of this article is to propose a comprehensive solution for analyzing multidimensional non-life claim count data that exhibits time and cross-dependence, as well as zero inflation. To achieve this, we introduce a multivariate INAR(1) model, with the innovation term characterized by either a multivariate zero-inflated Poisson distribution or a multivariate zero-inflated hurdle Poisson distribution. Additionally, our modeling framework accounts for the impact of individual and coverage-specific covariates on the mean parameters of each model, thereby facilitating the computation of customized insurance premiums based on varying risk profiles. To estimate the model parameters, we employ a novel expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm. Our model demonstrates satisfactory performance in the analysis of European motor third-party liability claim count data.

Calculating Premiums for Extreme-Tail Risks with Liability Claims and Nuclear Verdicts

Purpose: When insurance claims, particularly liability claims and nuclear verdicts, are governed by fat-tailed distributions, considerable uncertainty exists about the value of the tail index. Material and Methods: Using the theory of risk aversion, this paper establishes a new premium principle (the power principle – analogous to the exponential principle for thin-tailed claims) and investigates its properties. Findings: Applied to claims arising from generalized Pareto distributions, the resultant premium is shown to be the ratio of the two largest expected claims. This structure provides a natural model for incorporating tail-index uncertainty into premiums. The theory is illustrated through possible ‘premiums’ for liability claims and nuclear verdicts, utilizing the consistent pattern of observed extremes. Implications to Theory, Practice and Policy: By integrating statistical methods for tail index estimation and addressing the inherent uncertainty, the power principle offers a robust framework for determining premiums in high-risk environments. The paper concludes with practical implications for insurers, highlighting the need for advanced risk management strategies and regulatory considerations in dealing with extreme liability claims.

Reviewing hereditary connective tissue disorders: Proposals of harmonic medicolegal assessments.

Hereditary connective tissue disorders (HCTDs) are a heterogeneous group of inherited diseases. These disorders show genetic mutations with loss of function of primary components of connective tissue, such as collagen and elastic fibers. There are more than 200 conditions that involve hereditary connective tissue disorders, while the most known are Marfan syndrome, Osteogenesis Imperfecta, and Ehlers-Danlos syndromes. These disorders need continuous updates, multidisciplinary skills, and specific methodologic evaluations sharing many medicolegal issues. Marfan syndrome and Ehlers-Danlos syndromes show a high risk of early sudden death. As a consequence of this, postmortem genetic testing can identify novel genotype-phenotype correlations which help the clinicians to assess personalized cardiovascular screening programs among the ill subjects. Genetic testing is also essential to identify children suffering from Osteogenesis Imperfecta, especially when a physical abuse is clinically suspected. However, this is a well-known clinical problem even though there are still challenges to interpret genetic data and variants of unknown significance due to the current extensive use of new genetic/genomic techniques. Additionally, the more significant applications and complexities of genomic testing raise novel responsibilities on the clinicians, geneticists, and forensic practitioners as well, increasing potential liability and medical malpractice claims. This systematic review provides a detailed overview on how multidisciplinary skills belonging to clinicians, medicolegal consultants, radiologists, and geneticists can cooperate to manage HCTDs from autopsy or clinical findings to genetic testing. Thus, technical aspects need to be addressed to the medicolegal community since there is no consensus works or guidelines which specifically discuss these issues.

Cross-sectional analysis of state and federal malpractice and medical liability claims for cutaneous energy-based device procedures, 1985 to 2023

Cross-sectional analysis of state and federal malpractice and medical liability claims for cutaneous energy-based device procedures, 1985 to 2023

Safeguarding human values: rethinking US law for generative AI’s societal impacts

AbstractOur interdisciplinary study examines the effectiveness of US law in addressing the complex challenges posed by generative AI systems to fundamental human values, including physical and mental well-being, privacy, autonomy, diversity, and equity. Through the analysis of diverse hypothetical scenarios developed in collaboration with experts, we identified significant shortcomings and ambiguities within the existing legal protections. Constitutional and civil rights law currently struggles to hold AI companies responsible for AI-assisted discriminatory outputs. Moreover, even without considering the liability shield provided by Section 230, existing liability laws may not effectively remedy unintentional and intangible harms caused by AI systems. Demonstrating causal links for liability claims such as defamation or product liability proves exceptionally difficult due to the intricate and opaque nature of these systems. To effectively address these unique and evolving risks posed by generative AI, we propose a “Responsible AI Legal Framework” that adapts to recognize new threats and utilizes a multi-pronged approach. This framework would enshrine fundamental values in legal frameworks, establish comprehensive safety guidelines, and implement liability models tailored to the complexities of human-AI interactions. By proactively mitigating unforeseen harms like mental health impacts and privacy breaches, this framework aims to create a legal landscape capable of navigating the exciting yet precarious future brought forth by generative AI technologies.

Professionalization of Clinical Ethics Consultants: A Need for Liability Protection?

Clinical Ethics Consultation (CEC) has grown significantly in the last decade, and efforts are being made to professionalize the practice. The American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) has been instrumental in this process, having published the Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for Healthcare Ethics Consultants and founded and endorsed the creation of the Healthcare Ethics Consultant Certified (HCEC) Certification Commission. The ASBH also published "core competencies" for healthcare ethics consultants and has delineated a clear identity and role of such consultants distinct from that other healthcare professionals. In addition, more enter the field armed with advanced degrees (MA and PhD) or certification in clinical ethics consultation. While some have questioned the trend toward professionalization, the momentum is clearly in its favor. This paper explores three questions: Does the professionalization of healthcare ethics consultation expose those engaged in the field to the types of liability claims faced by professionals in other fields? What specific liabilities could affect a healthcare ethics consultant? And finally, what should healthcare ethics consultants do to protect themselves against liability claims? We conclude that while the risk of liability remains low, those engaged in the field should accept that risk just as part of their status as professionals and, like those in allied professions, seek appropriate protection in the form of liability insurance.

Artificial Intelligence in the French Law of 2024

The use of artificial intelligence in France is growing and intensifying in many areas, particularly in the field of justice. French President Macron has made it one of his government’s priorities to build on these assets and make France a world leader in AI. In parallel, the French government has deployed some efforts towards anticipating the regulatory challenges related to AI, the “National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence” launched as part of «France 2030» . As an illustration of the developments in artificial intelligence and its specific regulation, the French parliament passed a law to ensure the proper conduct of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games (Law N° 2023-380 of 19.05.2023). The law permits the use of the experimental “augmented video-protection” technology, which uses cameras equipped with AI systems to detect and report specific events in real time. French regulations begin already now in the area of justice and must continue in the fields of AI liability and intellectual property. AI is a source of fears, particularly for the respect of human rights, and requires a very elaborate legal and ethical environment that is flexible enough to avoid slowing down the development of AI. The AI Liability EU Directive complements the Artificial Intelligence Act by introducing a new liability regime that ensures legal certainty, enhances consumer trust in AI, and assists consumers’ liability claims for damage caused by AI-enabled products and services. But the new European AI Act does not resolve all issues that therefore need to be addressed nationally.

Egzekucja roszczeń odszkodowawczych w związku z wywołaniem i prowadzeniem wojny napastniczej

The article presents key issues related to the assertion of claims for liability for damages resulting from the instigation and conduct of a war of aggression. These issues have become topical again not only due to revival of the discussion concerning claims for damages caused during the Second World War, but also due to the ongoing armed conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine since 2021. At present, there are no codified, uniform and well-established legal principles in this area regarding the claims themselves in general, or for their enforcement. Under international law, a war of aggression can certainly give rise to an obligation to provide compensation on the part of the state that caused or conducted it (the responsible state).In the twentieth century, the issue of liability for reparations was primarily regulated in acts of peace-making, most famously in the Treaty of Versailles. However, there is still an ongoing theoretical discussion as to whether and how liability for damages can be effectively claimed by the injured state, but also by individuals – on the basis of the rules of international law or even domestic law, since these entities do not, in principle, have international legal subjectivity. Indeed, individual claims are or at least can also be the subject of international agreements. In this context, the article points to a trend away from the principle of absolute jurisdictional immunity of states in favour of limited immunity, which should also be applied to immunity from enforcement. This leads to the question of the desirability of moving away from rigid rules of protection for states when, by provoking and waging a war of aggression, they can on this basis avoid liability for their own unlawful actions. Furthermore, given the limited framework of legal instruments of influence in relations between states, the question arises as to whether and which measures (including the long-known so-called precautionary measures) can be used unilaterally not only against a state, but also against its citizens and the assets of the legal entities subject to its legislation. In practice, it is precisely such measures that can serve to secure claims for damages through the seizure of property assets. However, it should not be forgotten that the application of such unilateral measures may be challenged in relations between Member States of the European Union. In addition, any expropriation or confiscation may be challenged as inadmissible not only under the constraints of Article 215 TFEU, but also in light of the protective norms of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR, and, at the level of state legislation, constitutional norms.

Rethinking compensation in light of the development of AI

ABSTRACT The opacity, autonomy and complexity of AI systems can stand in the way of a fair and efficient allocation of risk and loss. The European Commission (EC) has recognized this and has addressed these matters in two proposals for two directives: the AI Liability Directive and a new Product Liability Directive. Both Directives address information asymmetries between parties in a liability claim by providing new rules on the burden of proof. In addition, the proposed Product Liability Directive has been brought ‘up-to-date’ by explicitly incorporating new technical developments and by ending the debate on software as a product. Nevertheless, the injured party might still not receive compensation for the damage caused by a defective AI-system. This gives rise to the question of whether the legal framework for compensation should be revised more boldly to ensure compensation for the damage suffered by the injured party. This contribution will explore such a bold approach by delving into compensation funds. More specifically, this contribution will examine how a compensation fund for damage caused by AI-systems can be designed as well as what its boundaries could or should be and what its benefits could be.

(126) Medicolegal Considerations for Patients Undergoing Urologic Surgical Interventions and the Development of an Audio-Recording Application for use During Genital Gender-Affirming Surgical Consultation

Abstract Introduction Patient recollection of details discussed during medical consultation is often limited (Figure 1a). For genital gender-affirming surgery (gGAS) consultations, lengthy discussions and deep contemplation surrounding surgical options are critical. Inadequate communication can result in patient complaints and medico-legal action, whereupon issues such as a lack of discussion or poor documentation can lead to medico-legal liability against the care provider and hospital system. As a result, strategies must be developed to ensure that information discussed during complex medical consultations are made available so patients can properly weigh out the care options presented. Objective 1) Assess medico-legal incidents in Urologic and surgical specialties in the UK, US, and a Californian quaternary care center, 2) evaluate the advantages and feasibility of offering audio-recordings of patient consultations, and 3) create a user-friendly smartphone app for recording healthcare consultations. Methods A literature review evaluated current evidence on medical liability claims in the UK and US was conducted. Additionally, our center's Department of Risk Management provided information pertaining to medico-legal cases against our institution. Separately, gGAS patients consented to audio-record their consultation. Copies were provided to patients and kept in their medical records. A follow-up survey assessed its usefulness, and based upon patient feedback, a smartphone application was developed. Results A PubMed search yielded 921 results on "medical malpractice claims" from 2013–2023. In Urologic Surgery, 32 papers addressed medical malpractice, with 2 providing data over the last 15 years. In the UK, 660 claims were made from 2010–2020, of which 8.2% were due to poor communication (37 = informed consent; 17 = lack of follow-up). In the US, from 2020–2022, 38.3% of Urologists faced at least one legal proceeding in their career, and 5.3% were sued within 1 year for any reason. Our institution's Department of Risk Management reported 32% of lawsuits were related to surgical care. Informed consent involved 8% of cases and had a component in 32%. The average financial settlement for medical malpractice was $125,000.00 USD, and trial costs averaged $75,000.00 USD. 50/71 patients completed an anonymized, online survey post-audio recording. Positive results were noted regarding recording quality, comfort whilst being recorded, and wishes for future consultation recordings (Figure 1b). In addition, most patients felt less anxiety, and had greater confidence in their treatment choice (Figure 1c) Based upon patient responses, we developed a smartphone App which records 90 minutes of audio, allows for file and hyperlink attachments to be sent to patients before immediately deleting all information (Figure 1d). Routine use of audio-recordings led to a reduction in patient queries to our office. Conclusions Routine audio recording of patient consultations provides significant benefits with minimal cost to providers. As per our institution's Office of Risk Management, it offers protection against medico-legal risks. Adequate discussion, good documentation and providing adjuncts for patients can help prevent a large proportion of medicolegal complaints in addition to optimizing patient care. Considering that patients face similar challenges across different disciplines and regions, a larger study (multi-center, international, multi-language) is warranted. Disclosure No.

Medico-Legal Implications of Video Recordings of Clinic Visits in Malpractice Claims Against Medical Providers.

Although audio-video recordings of clinic visits improvepatient satisfaction and recall, the associated presumed risk of increased malpractice claims limits their use. In this study, we identified whether video recording clinic visits was associated with increases in professional liability claims. From 2015 to 2017, the institution's loss run was analyzed, and the rates of medical malpractice claims per physician-year were compared between physicians who used video recordings of clinic visits (V-RoCs) and those who did not. The term "users" was applied to all physicians whose mean percentage of patient visits with video recording was greater than the mean percentage for the practice overall. Over three years, 15,254 patients used V-RoCs. The use of video recordings for clinic visits increased at a rate of 23% per year. No association was found between video recordings and increased malpractice claims. The rate of all claims between users and nonusers did not differ significantly (P=0.66). Of seven paid claims or lawsuits from 2000 to 2017, none were against physicians who used video recordings. Video recording of patient-physician encounters was not associated with an increase in malpractice lawsuits. According to federal law, a patient can legally record a clinic encounter without physician consent, which has many ethical implications. Formalizing the recording process is beneficial for both parties and allows the resource to be used to its maximum potential.

(037) Medicolegal Considerations for Patients Undergoing Urologic Surgical Interventions and the Development of an Audio-Recording Application for Use During Genital Gender-affirming Surgical Consultation

Abstract Introduction Patient recollection of details discussed during medical consultation is often limited (Figure 1a). For genital gender-affirming surgery (gGAS) consultations, lengthy discussions and deep contemplation surrounding surgical options are critical. Inadequate communication can result in patient complaints and medico-legal action, whereupon issues such as a lack of discussion or poor documentation can lead to medico-legal liability against the care provider and hospital system. As a result, strategies must be developed to ensure that information discussed during complex medical consultations are made available so patients can properly weigh out the care options presented. Objective 1) Assess medico-legal incidents in Urologic and surgical specialties in the UK, US, and a Californian quaternary care center, 2) evaluate the advantages and feasibility of offering audio-recordings of patient consultations, and 3) create a user-friendly smartphone app for recording healthcare consultations. Methods A literature review evaluated current evidence on medical liability claims in the UK and US was conducted. Additionally, our center's Department of Risk Management provided information pertaining to medico-legal cases against our institution. Separately, gGAS patients consented to audio-record their consultation. Copies were provided to patients and kept in their medical records. A follow-up survey assessed its usefulness, and based upon patient feedback, a smartphone application was developed. Results A PubMed search yielded 921 results on "medical malpractice claims" from 2013-2023. In Urologic Surgery, 32 papers addressed medical malpractice, with 2 providing data over the last 15 years. In the UK, 660 claims were made from 2010-2020, of which 8.2% were due to poor communication (37 = informed consent; 17 = lack of follow-up). In the US, from 2020-2022, 38.3% of Urologists faced at least one legal proceeding in their career, and 5.3% were sued within 1 year for any reason. Our institution's Department of Risk Management reported 32% of lawsuits were related to surgical care. Informed consent involved 8% of cases and had a component in 32%. The average financial settlement for medical malpractice was $125,000.00 USD, and trial costs averaged $75,000.00 USD. 50/71 patients completed an anonymized, online survey post-audio recording. Positive results were noted regarding recording quality, comfort whilst being recorded, and wishes for future consultation recordings (Figure 1b). In addition, most patients felt less anxiety, and had greater confidence in their treatment choice (Figure 1c) Based upon patient responses, we developed a smartphone App which records 90 minutes of audio, allows for file and hyperlink attachments to be sent to patients before immediately deleting all information (Figure 1d). Routine use of audio-recordings led to a reduction in patient queries to our office. Conclusions Routine audio recording of patient consultations provides significant benefits with minimal cost to providers. As per our institution's Office of Risk Management, it offers protection against medico-legal risks. Adequate discussion, good documentation and providing adjuncts for patients can help prevent a large proportion of medicolegal complaints in addition to optimizing patient care. Considering that patients face similar challenges across different disciplines and regions, a larger study (multi-center, international, multi-language) is warranted. Disclosure No.

Achieving True Strict Product Liability (But Not For Plaintiffs With Fault)

Under modern tort law, the “strict” product liability cause of action does not impose true strict liability (liability without fault). This Article suggests that this counterintuitive development is not the byproduct of a policy choice. Instead, an unresolved doctrinal difficulty is responsible for the modern requirement that a plaintiff prove fault before winning on a “strict” product liability claim. The doctrinal difficulty is this: How can tort law impose liability on faultless product manufacturers while simultaneously preventing plaintiffs with fault from being able to recover under a true strict liability standard? This Article posits that both results are desirable—true strict product liability, but not for plaintiffs with fault—but that it is analytically difficult to assemble tort doctrine to get both results. Without a doctrinal solution that allows for both results, courts have (mostly) retreated from a true strict product liability standard. This Article offers a simple solution to this analytical/doctrinal riddle: Restoring the strict product liability cause of action such that it truly imposes liability without fault, while allowing defendants a contributory negligence (flat-bar) defense to this strict liability claim. Under this doctrinal change, plaintiffs without fault would be able to recover from manufacturers on a true strict product liability claim. Plaintiffs with fault, however, would be forced to pursue a negligence claim, meaning that their ability to recover would require them to show that the defendant also had fault. This doctrinal fix uses tools and concepts already familiar to modern tort law and is thus easily achievable. In fact, all that is necessary to effectuate this result is a simple, minor change to the current comparative fault jury instructions used in most jurisdictions.

From insight to compliance: Appropriate technical and organisational security measures through the lens of cybersecurity maturity models

Cybersecurity is a much-debated topic in both technical and legal scholarship. With contemporary business models hinging on highly performant information systems, there is increased awareness among entrepreneurs that security incidents often have devastating consequences on undertakings’ revenue streams, intellectual property, and brand reputation. As a result, there is an increased focus on the obligation to implement cybersecurity measures. In the context of the GDPR, cybersecurity obligations seem to converge on the requirement to deploy ‘appropriate technical and organisational measures’ in order to ensure a level of security commensurate with the risks posed to an organisation. Yet, given the complex and rapidly evolving nature of the subject matter, the precise meaning and scope of these obligations remain unclear. This contribution offers guidance on how to assess the concept of ‘appropriate technical and organisational measures’ by considering it through the lens of cybersecurity maturity models. Accordingly, this article provides anchorage to scholarly audiences when scrutinizing the extent to which privacy and security measures qualify as ‘appropriate’ in the context of liability claims and actions for damages, thereby creating an opportunity to move from technical insight to legal compliance.

Implementation of an Electrosurgical Checklist in a Podiatry Unit in Relation to a Case of Inadvertent Burns during Hallux Valgus Surgery

Iatrogenic burns are unpleasant and sometimes difficult to explain to patients. Podiatric surgeons routinely use electrosurgical devices to cut and coagulate tissue during surgical procedures. Although advances in technology have made electrosurgery increasingly safer for patients and personnel, its use is still poorly understood by the surgical community, and the hazards associated with its use still exist presently. Human error, direct or indirect transfer of electricity to a conductive device, or device malfunction can cause serious adverse events, including burns, electrical shocks, and or fires. Here, we report a rare case of a 43-year-old man who suffered severe burns during hallux valgus surgery. The surgeon and the nursing staff did not notice any injuries during the surgical intervention. This unusual clinical case serves to highlight the importance of implementing protocols to prevent injuries related to the use of electrosurgery. Based on this report, a specific checklist was implemented to prevent adverse events related to electrosurgery in our podiatric surgery unit to reduce the risk of electrosurgical complications. The implementation of the checklist can be useful to help health professionals improve patient safety during surgery and avoid potential medico–legal liability claims.

Questions of fault liability: A case study analysis of in-orbit collisions with debris

In 1972, the international community established a regime of liability for damages occurring in outer space based on ‘fault’. Fifty years later, the congested and polluted reality of the space environment has limited dramatically its effectiveness. Only in very few instances, filing a claim under such regime can reasonably ensure compensation to an injured satellite operator. The present paper describes different study cases where resorting to a fault-based liability claim appears problematic. Based on real conjunction assessment alerts, the authors look into various hypothetical scenarios from the perspective of a fictitious satellite operator, whose spacecraft was damaged by an accidental collision in orbit. The aim is to analyse the effective observability over orbital collisions involving small satellites and space debris (attributable or not) and to evaluate the real chances of obtaining compensation, from the operational and legal points of view. At the centre of this study, therefore, is the evaluation, in fact and in law, of the solidity of a potential claim against the perpetrator of the harm. To that end, the discourse takes into consideration the legal difficulties that are generally connected to fault-based liabilities in international law.The definitional vagueness of the term ‘fault’, the necessity to identify a fault-standard, the proof of failure in the performance of a duty of care, are all elements to consider for filing a claim under the liability regime of 1972.However, next to them, the space environment poses additional hurdles with regard to facts and evidence. Satellite operators do not always have the technological instruments to retrieve all the information related to orbital events, such as collisions. Moreover, a complete observability over in-orbit events can be hard to reach for several classes of spacecraft (e.g. small, nano- or pico-satellites). This is especially troublesome for establishing one of the essential elements of ‘fault’: the so-called “chain of causation”. The authors will present their views on how the uncertainties posed by the liability regime of 1972 can be dealt with from a legal and from a technical perspective. In addition, several possible legal solutions and recommendations for the upcoming years of in-orbit operations and space traffic management will be proposed at the end.

Detection and treatment of outliers for multivariate robust loss reserving

AbstractTraditional techniques for calculating outstanding claim liabilities such as the chain-ladder are notoriously at risk of being distorted by outliers in past claims data. Unfortunately, the literature in robust methods of reserving is scant, with notable exceptions such as Verdonck & Debruyne (2011, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 48, 85–98) and Verdonck & Van Wouwe (2011, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics,49, 188–193). In this paper, we put forward two alternative robust bivariate chain-ladder techniques to extend the approach of Verdonck & Van Wouwe (2011, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics,49, 188–193). The first technique is based on Adjusted Outlyingness (Hubert & Van der Veeken, 2008. Journal of Chemometrics,22, 235–246) and explicitly incorporates skewness into the analysis while providing a unique measure of outlyingness for each observation. The second technique is based on bagdistance (Hubert et al., 2016. Statistics: Methodology, 1–23) which is derived from the bagplot; however; it is able to provide a unique measure of outlyingness and a means to adjust outlying observations based on this measure.Furthermore, we extend our robust bivariate chain-ladder approach to an N-dimensional framework. The implementation of the methods, especially beyond bivariate, is not trivial. This is illustrated on a trivariate data set from Australian general insurers and results under the different outlier detection and treatment mechanisms are compared.

Prospectus Liability in Europe: The Relevant Breach of Duties

Abstract This article focuses on the relevant breach of duties under art 11 of the Prospectus Regulation (EU) 1129/2017, which provides only few elements of the private enforcement model, leaving the specific choices of the civil liability regime to the Member States. The main purpose of this paper is to underline the contradiction that exists between (i) a rigid formalism in the Prospectus Regulation and the extensive administrative rulebook and related soft law, which imposes binding formats and contents of prospectuses in order to enhance maximum harmonised investor protection and reduce issuers’ costs in Europe, and (ii) the existing different prospectus liability regimes among the European Member States, which undermine the effectiveness of Union law on prospectuses. In order to highlight this contradiction, the contribution analyses the different legal bases of prospectus liability provided in a sample of Member States, focusing on the different (and sometimes conflicting) methods of defining, from the defendant’s side, the persons responsible and liable for the incompleteness or the incorrectness of the prospectus, and, from the plaintiff’s side, the persons who can sue for damages. In this scenario, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has recently brought some clarity as regards the potential scope of prospectus liability claims, thus revealing how important it is to solve the above-mentioned contradiction soon.

South African physiotherapists' attitudes to medicine prescription as an extension of practice.

The extension of medicine prescription rights to other healthcare providers was proposed to reduce pharmacotherapeutic service delivery challenges in the South African healthcare sector. The scope of practice of physiotherapists is being reviewed to possibly include prescription rights to promote service delivery. Our study assessed the attitudes of registered South African physiotherapists to the inclusion of prescription rights in their scope of practice, including enablers and challenges, and the drug classes they believe to be most relevant. A cross-sectional descriptive survey of South African registered physiotherapists was completed using an online questionnaire. A total of 359 participants completed the questionnaire, where 88.2% agreed that prescribing rights should be introduced, and 87.64% would want to be trained to prescribe. Participants identified several benefits: improved service delivery (91.3%); reduced healthcare delivery costs (89.8%); decreased need for multiple healthcare practitioner consultations (93.2%). Concerns included: inadequate training (55%); increased workload (18.7%); increased insurance premiums against medical liability claims (46.2%). Drugs of relevance included analgesics (95.6%) and bronchodilators (96.0%), while low preference was placed on drugs unrelated to physiotherapy. Chi-square analysis revealed associations between specific drug classes and fields of expertise. South African physiotherapists agree that prescribing and a limited formulary would benefit their scope of practice; however, educational concerns are evident. Findings support the drive to extend the South African physiotherapy scope of practice, however, investigation will be needed to determine the most appropriate way to capacitate future physiotherapists and current graduates should the extension be approved.