Class Notes (837,484)
New Zealand (288)
Law (12)
LAWS101 (12)
Lecture 8

STAT Lecture 8.docx

4 Pages
50 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Law
Course
LAWS101
Professor
Donna Buckingham
Semester
Fall

Description
21/03 Legislation 8: How do the courts accommodate competing considerations? Such as the right of a party to bring before a court all relevant evidence touching on the matter in dispute as well as the protection of certain relationships which have an inherent element of confidence, from invasion by the court process. The Evidence Act 1908 Provides protection from the scrutiny of a court for communications between husband and wife, by a confessor to a minister and by a patient to a doctor. 8. Communications to clergymen and medical men- (2) A physician or surgeon shall not, without the consent of the patient, divulge in any civil proceeding (unless the sanity of the patient is the matter in dispute) any communication made to him in his professional character by such a patient, and necessary to enable him to prescribe or act for such a patient. Insurance is considered a private contract. One must disclose all relevant information on making this contract, in order to be able to collect insurance should the circumstances arise that this is needed. If you are not absolutely truthful in the information you give the insurance contract, the insurance company can decline to pay out on your death. Whether we, acting for the insurance company, can call the doctor who treated Mr Bellamy to prove that he didn‟t disclose everything he should have in the initial screening interview he completed in order to obtain his life insurance. Lucena v. NMLA Three types of information exchanged:  What the doctors saw when they treated Mr Lucena.  What the doctors told him after an examination- communication by a doctor to a patient.  What Lucena told to a doctor after the examination. Judge would rule that Lucena was not truthful when he filled out his insurance policy, therefore did not fulfil his part of the contract and the insurance company can therefore refuse to carry out their own obligations according to the contract. Lucena‟s Estate- personal representative after his death- argued that this section in the 1908 evidence act that this evidence to be permissible in court. “Shall not” – absolute “and” – another requirement by the Act. Issues:  Do doctors fall within the category of „physician‟? Yes  “Shall not”- negative injunction- do these doctors have the consent of the patient to divulge? No- not without consent.  “Civil proceeding”? Breach of contact falls under civil proceeding.  Sanity of the patient- is not an issue.  Was there communication? The facts tell us that some information was passed- was this information made to the physician in his professional character? Yes, it was on a clinical basis.  And was it necessary to enable the physician to prescribe or act for the patient? Whatever got communicated was for the purpose of treatment. In terms of the evidence that the insurance company would like to use in court, this act is telling us that they could not show a form containing the communication made to a doctor in a professional capacity by a patient- it falls within the words of the section. Can they use what the doctor told to Lucena, after examination? This raises the issue of whether a court can examine as evidence the communication made to a patient by a doctor- using the plain meaning of the section, this kind of communication is not protected from the scrutiny of the court. As for what the doctor observed about the patient‟s body and recorded, based on these words, whether or not it can be used in evidence depends on the interpretation of the word „communication‟.  One could argue that when a physician looks at a patient, he is gaining information through the result of past study therefore their own personal knowledge and expertise. Not a communication by a patient to a doctor that will be protected from the court.  If we give „communication‟ a wider meaning- the estate will argue that communication can cover everything:  What the patient tells the doctor- evidently  What the doctor tells the patient  What the doctor discovers as a result of examination-
More Less

Related notes for LAWS101

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit