The Consumer Protection Act, 2019: A critical analysis from a medical practitioner’s perspective

Q3 Medicine

Indian journal of medical ethics Pub Date : 2023-11-27 DOI:10.20529/ijme.2023.073

Bhavika Vajawat, D. Dinakaran, O. V. Nandimath, Arpitha Hc, C. Kumar, C. Basavarajappa, Suresh Bada Math

{"title":"The Consumer Protection Act, 2019: A critical analysis from a medical practitioner’s perspective","authors":"Bhavika Vajawat, D. Dinakaran, O. V. Nandimath, Arpitha Hc, C. Kumar, C. Basavarajappa, Suresh Bada Math","doi":"10.20529/ijme.2023.073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The landmark judgment in the case of Indian Medical Association v VP Shantha in 1995 brought the medical profession under the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, was later repealed and replaced by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This article delves into the implications of the 2019 Act, highlighting significant changes in its scope, including the expansion of the definition of \"consumer\" and the incorporation of telemarketing and e-commerce within its ambit. Moreover, the amendments affect pecuniary jurisdiction, grounds for litigation, and introduce mediation cells, and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA). This article underscores concerns related to an increase in frivolous cases against medical practitioners and in defensive practice, ultimately impacting the overall quality of patient care. Recommendations for timely redressal and safeguards against unwarranted litigation are proposed to mitigate the adverse implications of the amended Act and ensure the well-being of both healthcare providers and patients.","PeriodicalId":35523,"journal":{"name":"Indian journal of medical ethics","volume":"357 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian journal of medical ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20529/ijme.2023.073","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The landmark judgment in the case of Indian Medical Association v VP Shantha in 1995 brought the medical profession under the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, was later repealed and replaced by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This article delves into the implications of the 2019 Act, highlighting significant changes in its scope, including the expansion of the definition of "consumer" and the incorporation of telemarketing and e-commerce within its ambit. Moreover, the amendments affect pecuniary jurisdiction, grounds for litigation, and introduce mediation cells, and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA). This article underscores concerns related to an increase in frivolous cases against medical practitioners and in defensive practice, ultimately impacting the overall quality of patient care. Recommendations for timely redressal and safeguards against unwarranted litigation are proposed to mitigate the adverse implications of the amended Act and ensure the well-being of both healthcare providers and patients.

查看原文本刊更多论文

2019 年消费者保护法：从医疗从业者的角度进行批判性分析

1995 年印度医学协会诉 VP Shantha 一案的里程碑式判决将医疗行业纳入了 1986 年《消费者保护法》的管辖范围。1986 年《消费者保护法》后来被废除，由 2019 年《消费者保护法》取代。本文深入探讨了 2019 年《消费者保护法》的影响，强调了其适用范围的重大变化，包括 "消费者 "定义的扩展以及将电话营销和电子商务纳入其适用范围。此外，修正案还影响了金钱管辖权、诉讼理由，并引入了调解小组和中央消费者保护局（CCPA）。本文强调了人们对针对医疗从业人员的琐碎案件和防御性做法增多的担忧，这最终会影响患者护理的整体质量。文章提出了及时纠正和防止无理诉讼的建议，以减轻修订后法案的不利影响，确保医疗服务提供者和患者的福祉。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Indian journal of medical ethics Medicine-Medicine (all)

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Indian Journal of Medical Ethics (formerly Issues in Medical Ethics) is a platform for discussion on health care ethics with special reference to the problems of developing countries like India. It hopes to involve all cadres of, and beneficiaries from, this system, and strengthen the hands of those with ethical values and concern for the under-privileged. The journal is owned and published by the Forum for Medical Ethics Society, a not-for-profit, voluntary organisation. The FMES was born out of an effort by a group of concerned doctors to focus attention on the need for ethical norms and practices in health care.