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.     

刑法和环境保护

<正> 最近几年,人们对利用刑法保护环境问题的兴趣大大增强。包括苏联在内的许多国家,对这个问题都通过了新的刑法。"刑法和环境保护"的问题,列入了1979年9月在汉堡召开的国际刑法协会第十二次会议的议事日程。不久前,在波兰对这个问题还进行了预备性的口试。刑法在保护环境中的作用。苏联宪法第十八条所规定的环境,是指经常影响人们、同时