Case 33-36501

Case No. 33-36501
Download Judgment: English Russian
Country: Russia
Region: Europe
Year: 2010
Court: Moscow City Court
Health Topics: Health systems and financing, Hospitals
Tags: Health facilities, Health regulation, Public hospitals

The applicant challenged an order by the lower court holding that the Ministry of healthcare and social development of the Russian Federation and Ministry of healthcare of Moscow region had no obligation to conduct official inspections into potential violations of his mother’s rights as a patient in the Moscow public healthcare system.

The applicant approached the Ministry of healthcare of Moscow to assert their obligations to investigate the cause of death of his mother and the medical services she had been provided. The Ministry replied that it would consider his request. The General Healthcare Directorate of the Administration of the Moscow Region replied and explained the reasons for his mother’s death. Based on his request, the Department which investigated organized crime conducted an inspection of the medical services provided to his mother. After investigation, a resolution was passed stating that no criminal charges should be brought for medical misconduct because no crime had occurred.

The applicant challenged the findings of the investigation and the resolution that had passed.

The Court dismissed the applicant's appeal, holding that the government entities had complied with their legal obligations by conducting an official investigation, and that investigation had determined that no legal violations had occurred. The applicant pointed out that the government entities were obliged upon his request to conduct official inspections concerning the provision of medical help, and to establish the cause of death of his mother, and the Court found that the government had done so.

"The Judicial board agrees with the conclusion of the court of the first instance about the refusal to satisfy the applicant’s claims about the obligation to conduct official inspection, since, as is shown in the case materials official inspection was conducted both by the City Prosecutor office of Himki and by experts from an insurance company, according to the findings of whose, violations in diagnostics and treatment of P.E. were not established." Page 1.

View full summary and print   |   Download summary as PDF