Region: Americas
Year: 2015
Court: Supreme Court of Justice [Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina]
Health Topics: Disabilities, Health care and health services, Health systems and financing, Hospitals, Mental health
Human Rights: Right to health, Right to life, Right to social security
Tags: Access to health care, Access to medicines, Access to treatment, Disabilities, Health funding, Health regulation, Mental illness, Poor, Social security
The plaintiff filed a guarantee of protection of individual constitutional rights (amparo protection) against the National Commission for the Integration of Disabled People [Comisión Nacional Asesora para la Integración de las Personas Discapacitadas] for them to provide the comprehensive coverage of the medical services the plaintiff needed due to her disability. The National Commission argued that the plaintiff did not comply with the legal requirements of law 24 901 to request the coverage of medical services given the fact that she had a private health insurance.
The National First Instance Court dismissed the amparo protection. The plaintiff filed an appeal with the Federal Civil and Commercial Court that accepted the claim and ordered the National Commission to provide the comprehensive coverage of the plaintiff. The respondent filed an extraordinary appeal with the Supreme Court of Justice, which was dismissed and then filed a complain with the Supreme Court of Justice.
The Supreme Court of Justice found that the previous court didn't make a correct interpretation of article 3 of law 24 901 that established that "The State, throughout its establishments, will provide to the disabled people that are not included in the health insurances system, when they or the persons that they depend on can't afford the following services". The Court of Appeal couldn't have reach to the conclusion that there was an obligation of the State to provide health coverage in this case because the plaintiff a health insurance and didn't prove that she wasn't able to afford the health services.
The Supreme Court admitted the extraordinary appeal and the complaint, revoked the previous judgement and send the case to the corresponding court to dictate a new judgement.