Clin Bénédicte, Ferrant Ophélie, Marquignon Marie-France, Letourneux Marc
Occupational Health Department, Caen University Hospital, Caen, France.
Med Law. 2009 Dec;28(4):615-36.
In France, contemporary medicolegal reparation system of occupational diseases--in particular occupational cancer--has been questioned, constantly, due to changes in the state's legal system. For a long time, associated legislation was considered as a genuine social breakthrough. However, it shall remain acknowledged that over the past 15 years, it has been the French legal system itself that generated a certain level of inequality among victims of occupational diseases.. This inequality came to exist following certain jurisdictional understandings of legal matters, as well as the creation of exceptional schemes for granting compensation for physical injuries. It is agreed by both, courts and compensatory funds, that full compensation must be granted for particular group of victims. Yet, this is not the case as for granting compensation over occupational diseases, where reparation is on a set lump sum basis. In light of this proved inequality in the France legal system, with regard to the medicolegal reparation for loss or damage, associated with a claimant's occupational activity, we aim at investigating the procedures as practiced in various European countries occupational cancer in order to identify optimal compensation for these disorders.
在法国,由于国家法律体系的变化,当代职业病——尤其是职业性癌症——的法医学赔偿制度一直受到质疑。长期以来,相关立法被视为一项真正的社会突破。然而,应当承认的是,在过去15年里,正是法国法律体系本身在职业病受害者之间造成了一定程度的不平等。这种不平等是在对法律事务的某些司法理解以及设立人身伤害赔偿特别计划之后出现的。法院和赔偿基金都同意,必须对特定受害者群体给予全额赔偿。然而,在职业病赔偿方面情况并非如此,职业病赔偿是一次性定额赔偿。鉴于法国法律体系在与索赔人的职业活动相关的损失或损害的法医学赔偿方面存在这种已被证实的不平等,我们旨在调查欧洲各国针对职业性癌症所采用的程序,以便确定对这些疾病的最佳赔偿方式。