A Case about Compensation for Negligence of Diagnosis of Brain Tumor in Japan: Did the Additional Complain Extinctive?
The plaintiff complained a physician who was the psychosomatic clinic of a clinical center at the university A for he didn’t diagnose that the plaintiff had already had a brain tumor when reading a report of computed tomography for his head. The tumor had increased and caused hydrocephalus as a consequence. The plaintiff had complained for compensation in 2013. His syndrome had been confirmed as the second level disability according to the appraisal on June 3rd 2015. The plaintiff had complained additionally for compensation on August 10th in the same year and for the attorney fee on February 25th in 2019. The legal issues in this case are whether there was the causality, the confirmation about the range of compensation and whether the addition complain for the attorney fee had already extinctive.