{"title":"跨不同司法管辖区的机会损失(原因)","authors":"R. Beran, V. Raposo, Yang Manman","doi":"10.1080/20517483.2020.1857116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the ‘loss of chance doctrine’ with a comparative perspective, across three different jurisdictions: China (where the loss of chance doctrine is in its infancy); continental Europe (in which many countries have adopted loss of chance to solve medical malpractice cases) and Australia (where loss of chance has been excluded by the High Court and is no longer a valid defense for negligence where causation is otherwise difficult to prove). The article compares these three different approaches to establish a line of development, from initial acceptance, through its widespread application, to finish with its judicial rejection, which might be a prediction about the future of this doctrine.","PeriodicalId":108655,"journal":{"name":"Peking University Law Journal","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Loss of chance across different jurisdictions (the why and wherefore)\",\"authors\":\"R. Beran, V. Raposo, Yang Manman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20517483.2020.1857116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article examines the ‘loss of chance doctrine’ with a comparative perspective, across three different jurisdictions: China (where the loss of chance doctrine is in its infancy); continental Europe (in which many countries have adopted loss of chance to solve medical malpractice cases) and Australia (where loss of chance has been excluded by the High Court and is no longer a valid defense for negligence where causation is otherwise difficult to prove). The article compares these three different approaches to establish a line of development, from initial acceptance, through its widespread application, to finish with its judicial rejection, which might be a prediction about the future of this doctrine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":108655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Peking University Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Peking University Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20517483.2020.1857116\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Peking University Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20517483.2020.1857116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Loss of chance across different jurisdictions (the why and wherefore)
ABSTRACT This article examines the ‘loss of chance doctrine’ with a comparative perspective, across three different jurisdictions: China (where the loss of chance doctrine is in its infancy); continental Europe (in which many countries have adopted loss of chance to solve medical malpractice cases) and Australia (where loss of chance has been excluded by the High Court and is no longer a valid defense for negligence where causation is otherwise difficult to prove). The article compares these three different approaches to establish a line of development, from initial acceptance, through its widespread application, to finish with its judicial rejection, which might be a prediction about the future of this doctrine.