交通事故後伴隨醫療過失之連帶責任【寰宇醫事裁判】 試閱
Joint Liability for Medical Negligence after Traffic Accident
被告Y1行駛車輛時未注意前方，導致車輛衝向對向車道後與被害者A的車輛正面相撞，A遭受頸部挫傷、頭胸部撞擊等重傷，入B醫院接受治療。被告Y2醫師投與大量腎上腺素，惟A嗣後出現失去意識、抽搐等症狀，並持續有黑色糞便；惟此時Y2仍未進行內視鏡檢查，只能施與抗潰瘍藥物。A之後病發心肌梗塞而轉入C醫院，被告Y3醫師雖先治療心肌梗塞並安排內視鏡檢查，惟檢查前A已休克而無法再進行檢查。A之家屬起訴肇事者與兩位醫師，法院認為Y1明知投與大量腎上腺素有消化道出血可能，且A因車禍而有壓力性胃潰瘍之可能，又當時狀況非進行內視鏡檢查將有危害A生命之情形，故Y1有過失。A轉院時已有休克症狀，已不具進行內視鏡檢查之條件，故Y2無過失。法院調查發現Y1之未及時檢查行為與Y1車禍行為，乃是A權利損害的具有接續性之共同原因，故成立共同侵權責任。
Defendant Y1 didn’t pay attention to the front of his vehicle, causing his vehicle to run into the opposite lane and collide head-on with victim A’s vehicle, who suffered serious injuries such as neck contusion and head and chest impacts, and was admitted to Hospital B for treatment. The defendant, physician Y2, administered a large amount of epinephrine, but A subsequently suffered from unconsciousness, convulsions, and continued to have black feces; however, at this time, Y2 had not yet performed an endoscopy, and was only given with anti-ulcer medication. A then suffered a myocardial infarction and was transferred to Hospital C. Although the defendant, physician Y3, first treated the myocardial infarction and arranged for an endoscopy, he couldn’t do so as A had already been in shock prior to it. The court held that Y1 was negligent because he knew that the large amount of epinephrine injected into A might cause gastrointestinal bleeding, and that A had pressure ulcers due to the car accident , and that the endoscopy was not performed under circumstances that would jeopardize A’s life; therefore, Y1 was negligent. But Y2 was not at fault according to the court, because he was already in shock at the time of this transfer to the hospital. The court found that Y1’s failure to conduct timely examination and Y1’s car accident were the common successive causes of A’s damage, and thus established the joint tort liability.
156-162
