Fault–Based Liability for Medical Malpractice in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Α Comparative Analysis of German and Greek Medical Liability Law in View of the Challenges Posed by AI Systems

Author:

Maroudas Vasileios P.ORCID

Abstract

The rapid developments in the field of AI pose intractable problems for the law of civil liability. The main question that arises in this context is whether a fault-based liability regime can provide sufficient protection to victims of harm caused by the use of ΑΙ. This article addresses this question specifically in relation to medical malpractice liability. Its main purpose is to outline the problems that autonomous systems pose for medical liability law, but more importantly, to determine whether and to what extent a fault-based system of medical liability can adequately address them. In order to approach this issue, a comparative examination of German and Greek law will be undertaken. These two systems, while similar in substantive terms, differ significantly at the level of the burden of proof. In this sense, their comparison serves as a good example to “test” the adequacy of the fault principle in relation to AI systems in the field of medicine, but also to illustrate the practical importance that rules on the allocation of the burden of proof can have in cases of damage caused by the use of AI. As will eventually become apparent, the main problem appears to lie not in the fault principle itself, which, for the time being, at least in the form of objectified negligence, seems to protect the patient adequately, but mainly in the general rule for the allocation of the burden of proof, which is precisely why the fault principle ends up working to the detriment of the patient.

Publisher

Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawla II

Reference61 articles.

1. Deutscher Juristentag. Beschlüsse. Bonn 2022. Accessed February 23, 2024. https://djt.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Beschluesse.pdf.

2. Ahrens, Hans-Jürgen. Der Beweis im Zivilprozess, 1st ed. Köln: Otto Schmidt Verlag, 2014.

3. von Bar, Christian. Verkehrspflichten: richterliche Gefahrsteuerungsgebote im deutschen Deliktsrecht. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 1980.

4. Baumgärtel, Gottfried. “Die beweisrechtlichen Auswirkungen der vorgeschlagenen EG-Richtlinie zur Dienstleistungshaftung.” Juristen Zeitung 47, no. 7 (April 1992): 321–5.

5. Beck, Susanne, Michelle Faber, Simon and Gerndt. “Rechtliche Aspekte des Einsatzes von KI und Robotik in Medizin und Pflege.” Ethik in der Medizin 35, no. 2 (April 2023): 247–63.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3