2025, Vol. 5, Issue 2, Part A

This research explores the boundaries of responsibility and compensation in medical errors, distinguishing between errors resulting from public medical facilities and the personal errors of individuals within them. The research analyzes how laws, especially in France and Iraq, deal with the responsibility of government hospitals and their employees for damages inflicted upon patients, noting that administrative responsibility is often based on fault, but its application varies under diverse circumstances. In public hospitals, the relationship between the patient and the doctor is often indirect, which makes the hospital administration the primary responsible party for errors that occur, given that the patient deals with the facility as a whole. The research addresses two main types of compensation:

•Judicial Compensation: Determined by the courts and can be monetary (either as a lump sum or in installments) or non-monetary (such as specific actions taken to compensate for the damage).

•Contractual Compensation: A pre-agreed amount stated in the contract, to be paid in the event of a breach of contractual obligations.

The research concludes that proving and denying medical responsibility is complex and requires careful legal scrutiny. It emphasizes the need for clear legislative frameworks that guarantee comprehensive and fair compensation for victims while also safeguarding public funds. The study recommends that compensation be assessed at the time of the judicial ruling in order to accurately reflect the actual extent of the damage incurred and to ensure justice.