Rogers v. Whitaker

The High Court of Australia affirmed the Supreme Court of New South Wales' determination that a doctor has a duty to warn a patient of any material risk involved in a proposed treatment. A risk is considered material if a reasonable person in similar circumstances would attach significance to the risk, or if the doctor is, or should be, cognizant that the particular patient would express concern about the risk. The trial court overruled the precept that a doctor could not be found negligent in warning a patient if the doctor acted within the purview of common practice, even though other practitioners may follow different procedures and regardless of the particular patient's concerns. In this case, Maree Whitaker became essentially blind after an unsucessful operation on her right eye caused sympathetic ophthalmia in her left eye. Although there was no question that the surgery had been performed with the requisite skill and care, Ms. Whitaker petitioned the court for relief due to the failure of the ophthalmologist, Dr. Christopher Rogers, to warn her of the possibility (approximately 1 in 14,000) that the sympathetic ophthalmia condition could develop. The trial court's award of damages was affirmed because, in spite of Ms. Whitaker's expressed specific concern that her "good eye" not be harmed, Dr. Rogers did not inform her of the potential risks associated with the surgery.     

发明获得法律保护的条件

<正> (一)能够取得专利的发明概念发明是专利法的客体。"发明"(Invention,Erfindung)概念的定义对任何一个法律体系来说都具有重要的实践意义,因为专利法效力的范围是由这个定义的内容决定的。同时,发明的定义引起颇大的复杂性,因为它表现了智力活动的一个侧面。由于这些原因,发明的概念曾是法律著作中反复探讨的对象。И.Я.赫伊费茨给发明下的定义是:技术课题的创造性解决方案。许多其他苏联作者也持这个观点。外国作者在给发