News Excerpt:
The Supreme Court reconsidered its judgment of Indian Medical Association vs. V P Shantha of 1995 to decide that the medical professionals whether fall under the purview of service as per the Consumer Protection Act or not.
More in the news:
- Recently, the court held that lawyers, as ‘professionals’, could not be subjected to legal proceedings for providing faulty ‘service’ under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA).
About the 1995 case:
- Argument:
-
- The knowledge and experience of the President as well as the members of the commission requires the capacity to deal with “economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration.”
- Therefore, since the members lacked knowledge in medical matters, they are not suited to deal with complex medical issues arising in cases dealing with the services of medical practitioners.
- Judgment:
-
- The court held that the burden is on the parties to provide the necessary evidence and material to allow the members to make an informed decision.
- Moreover, the court held that a doctor owes certain duties to their patients — duties of care in deciding whether to treat the patient, what treatment to give, and how the treatment is administered. If the doctor does not exercise a “reasonable degree of care” and breaches one of these duties, the court holds that they can be liable for deficiency in service.
2024 status:
- The Supreme Court was of the view that “professionals”, should not be held to the same standard as other occupations.
- These occupations include Lawyers and Doctors.
- They held that the purpose of the CPA was to protect consumers from “unfair trade practices and unethical business practices only” and that the legislature never “intended to include the Professions or the Professionals within the purview of the Act”.
- Considering the definition of ‘service’ in the CPA (both 1986 and 2019 Act) the court held that it excludes two types of services including those that are free of charge and the other being those which are given under a ‘contract of personal service’.
- The definition with respect to medical profession carves three types of service:
- Services given free of cost to everybody
- Paid services to everybody
- Services which exempt certain categories of people who cannot afford paying.
- The Court ruled that the first service is not included under the CPA, unlike the second one (contract of personal service) which is considered as service under the CPA.
- Further, focusing on the third type of service, the court held that providing protections only to the consumers who could afford to pay for medical services may lead to providing inferior quality services to those who cannot pay. Therefore, to avoid this inequality, the court held that hospitals and doctors falling under the third category will fall under the definition of ‘service’ regardless of whether it is free or not.
The nature of doctor-patient relationship:
- The court held that medical care is not provided as a ‘contract of personal service’.
- The contract of personal service is limited to situations where there is an employer-employee or a “master and servant” relationship between the two parties.
- Therefore, “since there is no relationship of master and servant between the doctor and the patient, the contract between the medical practitioner and his patient cannot be treated as a contract of personal service”.
Legal remedies and the way forward:
- Tort: The patients can file a civil suit under negligence in case of any.
- Consumer Protection Act 2019: The hospitals providing free services to certain sections and paid to the others are covered under definition of ‘services’ given under section 2(17) of the Act. The Patients can seek remedies under Section 2(1)(o) for deficiencies in medical services.
- Indian Penal Code (IPC):
-
- Section 304A: Deals with cases of death by negligence.
- Section 338: Deals with cases of causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety.
- Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette, and Ethics) Regulations, 2002: This regulation lays down the standards of professional conduct and ethics for registered medical practitioners in India. The patients can file complaints against doctors for their conduct.
- Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI): Patients under section 2(f) and 2(j) can seek information regarding their medical treatment, including medical records and treatment procedures, under the provisions of the RTI Act.
