INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION V/S V P SHANTHA (1995)

Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy: https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/judgment-bringing-doctors-under-consumer-protection-act-requires-reconsideration-supreme-court-257852

Context: The Supreme Court has ruled that lawyers are not liable under the Consumer Protection Act.

Background

• The recent ruling by the Supreme Court regarding the liability of lawyers under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) has sparked a reconsideration of its 1995 verdict concerning medical professionals. The 1995 judgement held that doctors could be sued under the CPA for providing faulty service, a decision now under scrutiny for its alignment with contemporary legal principles.

Insights from the 1995 Ruling

• Recognition of Medical Service: The court acknowledged that medical professionals provide a "service" as defined in the CPA, emphasising their duties of care towards patients.
• Standard of Care: It was established that doctors owe patients a duty of care, and failure to meet this standard may lead to liability for deficiency in service.
• Complexity of Legal Proceedings: Despite concerns about the complexity of medical issues in consumer court proceedings, the court upheld the applicability of the CPA, relying on the expertise of commission members and the burden of proof on parties.
• Exemption and Equitable Access: The court addressed exemptions for free medical services, ensuring equitable access to legal protections under the CPA for all patients, regardless of their ability to pay.

Reevaluation in Light of Contemporary Legal Principles

• Consistency with Current Legal Framework: The reconsideration of the 1995 ruling reflects evolving legal interpretations and standards, especially in light of recent judgments regarding other professions like lawyers.
• Equitable Access to Justice: The court may revisit the balance between protecting consumers' rights and ensuring fairness to medical professionals, particularly concerning the complexity of medical issues in consumer court proceedings.
• Clarification of Legal Definitions: There may be a need to clarify the definitions of "service" and "deficiency" under the CPA, considering the unique nature of medical practice and the doctor-patient relationship.
• Role of Consumer Redressal Commissions: The court may reassess the composition and expertise of consumer redressal commissions to ensure effective adjudication of medical disputes while safeguarding the interests of all parties involved.

Conclusion

• The Supreme Court's decision to review its 1995 ruling on consumer court proceedings against medical professionals signifies a commitment to uphold legal principles, address evolving challenges, and ensure equitable access to justice.

Must Read Articles:

CENTRAL CONSUMER PROTECTION AUTHORITY

Source:

Indian Express