Suchergebnisse

Changing legal relationship of doctors and patients, growing number of civil proceedings for doctor's damage for medical patients, million worth claims for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages, huge media attention for unqualified health care given to the patients require extensive analysis of legal literature, legislation and case law in order to determine concept of medical malpractice as a concept of civil liability and to determine what standard for doctors liability is applied in Lithuania. Based on the analysis results, it is stated that Lithuanian case law established maximum standard of medical liability (unlike the UK, where courts apply average standard of medical liability) is only an objective criterion, which is not regulated by law. According to the legal regulation of the two countries, doctors must act carefully, not causing damage, follow the appropriate scientific knowledge and level of development, applied practice of medicine, ethics rules, principles of fairness and reasonableness etc. For this reason, according to author's opinion, it is inappropriate to apply a maximum standard of medical liability and it is proposed to abolish it, seeking clarity and less confusion during civil litigations of medical liability. ; Remiantis gydytojo pareiga suteikti tinkamą gydymą analizuojamas gydytojo veiksmų neteisėtumas, apžvelgiant gydytojo ir paciento santykių, gydytojo teisių bei pareigų, gydytojo kvalifikacijai keliamų reikalavimų teisinį reguliavimą. Analizuojant Lietuvos ir Jungtinės Karalystės teismų praktiką lyginamosios analizės metodu, siekiama nustatyti esminius skirtumus bei panašumus vertinant gydytojo civilinės atsakomybės standartą dėl gydytojo neteisėtų veiksmų, t. y. kai jis nesilaiko pareigos teikti tinkamą gydymą. Atlikus teisės aktų sisteminę analizę bei pasirinktų valstybių lyginamąją analizę, nustatyta, kad pagrindinių skirtumų civilinės atsakomybės standarto taikymui dėl gydytojo pareigos suteikti tinkamą gydymą nėra. Vis dėlto, Lietuvos teismų praktikoje įtvirtintas maksimalus gydytojo civilinės atsakomybės standartas, o Jungtinės Karalystės teismų praktikoje taikomas vidutinis gydytojo civilinės atsakomybės standartas. Remiantis tyrimo rezultatais, darytina išvada, kad abiejose valstybėse tai – objektyvus kriterijus, todėl pragmatiniu požiūriu nėra įmanoma nustatyti, kada vertinama, kad gydytojas veikia maksimaliai, nes nėra objektyvaus, įstatymais reglamentuoto atskaitos taško. Analizuojamų valstybių teismų praktikoje įtvirtinta, kad gydytojai turi veikti rūpestingai, nepadaryti žalos, vadovautis atitinkamu mokslo ir žinių išsivystymo lygiu, taikoma medicinos praktika, etikos taisyklėmis, sąžiningumo ir protingumo principais ir kt. Dėl šios priežasties manytina, kad netikslinga taikyti maksimalų gydytojo civilinės atsakomybės standartą bei siūlytina jo atsisakyti siekiant aiškumo ir mažiau painiavos sprendžiant teisminius ginčus dėl gydytojų civilinės atsakomybės taikymo.

EU General Data Protection Regulation, by the theoretical and practical view, reforms EU data protection legal regulation and establishes a uniformly high standard of privacy data protection - the impact of any government institution or company on data protection will have to become permanent and one of the central element of planning and implementing any activity. The EU General Data Protection Regulation not only sets new rules for data processing, but also in detail regulates the rights of data subjects, extends the content of these rights and establishes the Data Protection Officer Institute. In this article, authors presents the main innovations related to data subjects' rights protection and data processing principles. The paper also analyzes the bases for the appointment of the Personal Data Protection Officer and the principles of his operation. Only the responsible processing and processing of personal data based on the principles enshrined in the Regulation protects data subject individual's right to privacy, also the data controller and data processor - against personal data protection breach. The relevance of this scientific article relates to the novelty and relevance of the General Data Protection Regulation and the importance of this document to data protection law. The purpose of this scientific article is to analyze the content of the main rights of data subject, identifying the means of ensuring data rights of the data subjects and examining the bases and principles of the activities of the data protection officer. Object of scientific article - General Data Protection Regulation contains the principles of data subjects' rights and the processing of personal data. To sum up is has to be drawn that the application of the General Data Protection Regulation has become a direct legal act and brings many innovations into countries national legal systems. The Regulation dramatically broadens the territorial scope of EU data protection law, strengthens the requirements for the lawfulness of the processing of personal data, extends the scope of liability for the processing of personal data, establishes a new obligation for a part of data controllers and data processors, appointment of a data protection officer, regulates the processing of personal data of children, strengthens the rights of subjects, tightens the requirements for the consent of the data subjects, and also increases the amount of fines for improper or unlawful processing of personal data. The establishment of the rights of data subjects in the General Personal Data Regulation aims to ensure that information is correct, used only for legitimate purposes and by those controllers who have the right to process specific data. The principles enshrined in the Regulation are considered to be clear legal requirements, which controller and processor must follow when controling and / or processing personal data. Regulation sets for data controllers binding guidelines for managing data in accordance with established principles, and each controller is required to define it in activity records. In this way, the responsibility of data controllers for the rights of data subjects is reinforced and the involvement of the data protection supervisory authority in the daily routine of data processing is reduced. The Regulation attaches a significant role to the Data protection officer throughout the entire data management system. The Data protection officer, in accordance with his mandate and assigned functions, shall be considered as a person who will not only be required to help data controllers and processors properly enforce data protection requirements but also act as an intermediary between data subjects, data controllers or processors and the data protection supervisory institution.

EU General Data Protection Regulation, by the theoretical and practical view, reforms EU data protection legal regulation and establishes a uniformly high standard of privacy data protection - the impact of any government institution or company on data protection will have to become permanent and one of the central element of planning and implementing any activity. The EU General Data Protection Regulation not only sets new rules for data processing, but also in detail regulates the rights of data subjects, extends the content of these rights and establishes the Data Protection Officer Institute. In this article, authors presents the main innovations related to data subjects' rights protection and data processing principles. The paper also analyzes the bases for the appointment of the Personal Data Protection Officer and the principles of his operation. Only the responsible processing and processing of personal data based on the principles enshrined in the Regulation protects data subject individual's right to privacy, also the data controller and data processor - against personal data protection breach. The relevance of this scientific article relates to the novelty and relevance of the General Data Protection Regulation and the importance of this document to data protection law. The purpose of this scientific article is to analyze the content of the main rights of data subject, identifying the means of ensuring data rights of the data subjects and examining the bases and principles of the activities of the data protection officer. Object of scientific article - General Data Protection Regulation contains the principles of data subjects' rights and the processing of personal data. To sum up is has to be drawn that the application of the General Data Protection Regulation has become a direct legal act and brings many innovations into countries national legal systems. The Regulation dramatically broadens the territorial scope of EU data protection law, strengthens the requirements for the lawfulness of the processing of personal data, extends the scope of liability for the processing of personal data, establishes a new obligation for a part of data controllers and data processors, appointment of a data protection officer, regulates the processing of personal data of children, strengthens the rights of subjects, tightens the requirements for the consent of the data subjects, and also increases the amount of fines for improper or unlawful processing of personal data. The establishment of the rights of data subjects in the General Personal Data Regulation aims to ensure that information is correct, used only for legitimate purposes and by those controllers who have the right to process specific data. The principles enshrined in the Regulation are considered to be clear legal requirements, which controller and processor must follow when controling and / or processing personal data. Regulation sets for data controllers binding guidelines for managing data in accordance with established principles, and each controller is required to define it in activity records. In this way, the responsibility of data controllers for the rights of data subjects is reinforced and the involvement of the data protection supervisory authority in the daily routine of data processing is reduced. The Regulation attaches a significant role to the Data protection officer throughout the entire data management system. The Data protection officer, in accordance with his mandate and assigned functions, shall be considered as a person who will not only be required to help data controllers and processors properly enforce data protection requirements but also act as an intermediary between data subjects, data controllers or processors and the data protection supervisory institution.

The problems of recourse and subrogation institutes regulation in the Civil Code of Republic of Lithuania are analyzed in this article. Distinction of institutes' problems becomes more apparent analyzing legal relations of insurance. Variables a nd application of recourse and subrogation remains unclear analyzing both legal doctrine and constantl y changing practice of Lithuanian Supreme Court. Legislature of Republic of Lithuania called Civil c ode chapter VII "transfer of legal requirement to t hird party in recourse order (subrogation)" thus contrib uting to confusion of recourse and subrogation equating. Relevance of the topic is also justified by the fac t that since new Lithuanian Civil code came into force seventeen years ago it still remains unclear criteria implicating recourse and subrogation in le gal relations. Recourse occurs after third party fulfil ls obligation for the debtor. This is a new recours e obligation which links debtor and party fulfilling debtor's obligation. Meanwhile, in the case of subrogation institute it is the same continuing obl igation causing consequences not only for the parti es to the insurance contract, but also to third partie s. The purpose of this scientific article is to analyze nature of recourse and subrogation institutes also to investigate legal framework of insurer's ri ghts claiming compensation from the liable person's and to perform comparative analysis of recourse and subrogation in insurance legal relations and dissociate these two institutes. Object of scientific article – features of recourse and s ubrogation institutes application in insurance legal relations. After analysis of legislation, legal doctrine and l egal practice of Lithuanian Supreme Court, it must be concluded that distinction between subrogat ion and recourse is important for the legal classification of the dispute relations. Calculatio n of time limits and applicable law is dependent if the creditor received legal requirement as a subrogatio n or acquired a right of recourse.

The problems of recourse and subrogation institutes regulation in the Civil Code of Republic of Lithuania are analyzed in this article. Distinction of institutes' problems becomes more apparent analyzing legal relations of insurance. Variables a nd application of recourse and subrogation remains unclear analyzing both legal doctrine and constantl y changing practice of Lithuanian Supreme Court. Legislature of Republic of Lithuania called Civil c ode chapter VII "transfer of legal requirement to t hird party in recourse order (subrogation)" thus contrib uting to confusion of recourse and subrogation equating. Relevance of the topic is also justified by the fac t that since new Lithuanian Civil code came into force seventeen years ago it still remains unclear criteria implicating recourse and subrogation in le gal relations. Recourse occurs after third party fulfil ls obligation for the debtor. This is a new recours e obligation which links debtor and party fulfilling debtor's obligation. Meanwhile, in the case of subrogation institute it is the same continuing obl igation causing consequences not only for the parti es to the insurance contract, but also to third partie s. The purpose of this scientific article is to analyze nature of recourse and subrogation institutes also to investigate legal framework of insurer's ri ghts claiming compensation from the liable person's and to perform comparative analysis of recourse and subrogation in insurance legal relations and dissociate these two institutes. Object of scientific article – features of recourse and s ubrogation institutes application in insurance legal relations. After analysis of legislation, legal doctrine and l egal practice of Lithuanian Supreme Court, it must be concluded that distinction between subrogat ion and recourse is important for the legal classification of the dispute relations. Calculatio n of time limits and applicable law is dependent if the creditor received legal requirement as a subrogatio n or acquired a right of recourse.