- 期刊
適用消費者保護法對醫療服務業的衝擊
The Impact of the Application of the Consumer Protection Law to Medical Service
摘要
自從醫療法第八十二條修訂後明文規定：「醫療機構及其醫事人員因執行業務致生損害於病人，以故意或過失為限，負損害賠償責任。」，醫界普遍認為，從此脫離了困擾多年，消費者保護法第7條無過失責任的枷鎖。然而事實上，現今法院實務上，以至學者們、消費者團體，對消費者保護法（以下簡稱消保法）醫療服務適用問題，仍有不同的解讀與意見。司法院或最高法院亦沒有統一的解釋，讓各界無所遵循。立法院在修法時，故意遺漏當初行政院衛生署提出的醫療法修正案第八十二條第三項，以期將這個燙手山芋丟回法院，讓法院依個案個別解釋。致使問題又似乎回到原點，令人不知所措。事實上，個人認為，醫界若真認為醫療服務應排除於消保法之外，應尋求法律界幫忙，促請司法院明確解釋，消保法第7條所稱之「服務」，並不包含醫療服務在內。又或退而求其次，要求立法者明確分類各種類型的醫療服務，將不適用的類型排除於消保法之外，如此才可一勞永日。
並列摘要
As Article 82 of medical law of our country has been revised on 2005, saying that medical service should only be liable negligently or intentionally, most people in the medical circle think that this newly revised medical law regulation provides that the Consumer Protection Act will not be applicable to medical behavior of doctor and medical organization anymore. However, different opinions still exist between consumer protection societies, scholars, and even in courts. The Judicial Yuan and the Supreme Court even have no definite explanations regarding whether the term ”service” in the Consumer Protection Act will include all kind of services, including medical services. This article argues that medical service is not ”service” in the Consumer Protection Act, and thus not the subject matter of the Act.
延伸閱讀
- 鄭雅文（2014）。「醫療旅遊」與《自由經濟示範區特別條例》對醫療體系的負面衝擊。醫療品質雜誌，8(4)，34-36。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=a0000532-201407-201410010015-201410010015-34-36
- 朱柏松（1994）。消費者保護法商品製造人責任規定之適用與解釋（上）。臺大法學論叢，24(1)，353-409。https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.1994.24.01.12
- 林大洋（2005）。醫療行為與消費者保護法。法令月刊，56(1)，4-12。https://doi.org/10.6509/TLM.200501_56(1).0001
- Chu, L. H. (2001). Consumer Protection Law Does Not Cover Medical Services. 理律法律雜誌（英文）, 2001(3), 14-14. https://doi.org/10.29492/LLB.200105.0022
- 游宗憲（2008）。A Case Study of Patient Self-actions in Medicolegal Issue。台灣醫學，12(3)，292-298。https://doi.org/10.6320/FJM.2008.12(3).04