Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu

његову противправну природу. Такву преображајну моћ има једино претходна сагласност обавештеног пацијента, односно његовог законског заступника. Без те сагласности захват јесте и остаје правно недопуштен и у случају када је њиме постигнут циљ коме се тежило. Стога има места казненој одговорности, због кривичног дела или прекршаја. 2. Грађанска одговорност због самовољног лечења има другачију логику, јер она претпоставља штету. Ако никаква штета није узрокована, ираво на надокиаду је искључено. Тада је реч о тзв. injuria sine darnno. Досуђивање ~задовољења“ због пуког огрешења лекара о пацијентово право располагања својим телесним интегритетом, било би у нескладу са моралом. А ни правни основ за такву меру ннје надохват руке.

Jakov Radisic

The arbitrary treatment of the patient and its legal nature Summary

The author sets out from the premise that the arbitrary treatment of a patient is a form of illegal treatment. One may speak of arbitrary treatment in the case when the patient is not asked for his consent to undergo a certain medical intervention, when he refuses to give his consent for the intervention or when his consent is not legally valid. It is possible to present arbitrary treatment as a social phenomenon and as a legal problem only through clarifying the consent for treatment and the conditions for its validity. The first part of the paper is devoted to this issue. In the second part of his paper, the author discusses the different academic interpretations regarding the legal nature of arbitrary treatment. He lays particular emphasis on the existence of different views about whether the prohibition of arbitrary treatment is solely to protect the patient's freedom to decide on his own physical integrity or physical integrity itself. The fonner viewpoint is upheld in the Criminal Code of Austria while the latter is to be found in the practice of the German and Swiss courts. However, these differences in criminal law have had no effect on civil liability in these countries because Austrian civil courts qualify the arbitrary treatment of patients as bodily injury. This means that the notions of bodily injury in criminal and civil law are different.

* Dr. Jakov Radisic, Professor of the Faculty of Law of the University of Kragujcvac.

379

Јаков Радишић, Самовољно лечење болесника (стр. 365-381)