She got skin burns from the laser device

170 thousand dirhams in compensation for a patient who suffered burns while removing fat

The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal upheld the ruling of the Court of First Instance requiring a medical center, a doctor, a nurse and an insurance company to pay a patient an amount of 170,000 dirhams in compensation for the material, psychological and moral damages that she suffered while receiving a laser treatment session to get rid of fats in the abdomen area, and she suffered burns In the skin it left a permanent disability.

The details of the case are due to a woman filing a lawsuit against a dermatology and cosmetic center and a doctor, in which she demanded that the two defendants pay her an amount of two million dirhams in compensation for the material, psychological and moral damages she suffered, and obligate them to pay the lawsuit’s fees and expenses and in return for attorneys ’fees, indicating that she went To the center for the treatment of fat in the abdominal area, and the doctor decided that the treatment would be with a device specialized in laser fat removal.

The plaintiff explained that she underwent the first treatment session without complications, and in the second session she felt severe pain during the operation of the device and told the nurse the "second entrance opponent" who was in charge of the device, noting that after the end of the session it was found that there were burns on the abdominal skin in the areas that were treated with laser. The doctor gave her creams and told her that the burns would disappear, but her condition worsened.

The plaintiff indicated that with the increase in pain, she tried to contact the doctor, but she did not respond, which forced her to go to the hospital, where it was found that she had suffered first and second degree burns, and had undergone a surgery that resulted in the removal of dead parts of the skin in the abdominal area, and that resulted in disability. Permanent abdominal skin rate of 5%.

She added that she had released a criminal case against the doctor, and a final ruling was issued against the doctor that fined her 100 thousand dirhams, and that 10 thousand dirhams were paid for the benefit of the plaintiff for causing her mistake to compromise the integrity of her body, and that was due to her breach and negligence, and not to follow caution and caution imposed on her by the assets of her profession.

The attorney of the first and second defendants submitted a memorandum in which he argued that it was not permissible to hear the case due to the previous ruling in the criminal judgment that has become final, as it ruled for the plaintiff to pay compensation, and thus the plaintiff obtained compensation, and it is not permissible to combine compensation and compensation, and he demanded the inclusion of three new opponents in the case «Company The insurance contracted with the center, as she is responsible for bearing compensation arising from the medical error, the nurse who undertook the treatment of the plaintiff, in addition to the hospital in which the plaintiff underwent surgery and was subjected to wrong medical treatment by emergency doctors in that hospital.

The court of first instance ordered the defendant to be obligated by the medical center, the doctor, the first entrance opponent (the insurance company), and the second entrance opponent (the nurse), to jointly pay the plaintiff an additional compensation of 170,000 dirhams.

Neither the defendant nor the two entered litigants accepted this judgment, so they challenged it before the Court of Appeal, crying out for the appealed judgment violation of the provisions of the law and the error in its application.

For its part, the Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal stated, in the merits of the ruling, that the appellants argued that the case for the previous ruling of the criminal judgment, which became final under the cassation judgment, was not considered permissible under the ruling of cassation, because it had ordered the plaintiff to indict the plaintiff for the injury she sustained in the amount of 10 thousand dirhams, as the decision is based on articles 49 And 50 of the Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Transactions that the point of authority preventing the hearing of the case for the previous ruling is that the previous judgment, whether civil or penal, cuts off his eyesight and insight in an argument before him and in a fundamental issue that does not change in the two lawsuits, which is necessary to settle the entire case without which the judgment is not valid. And upheld the appealed judgment and obligated each appellant to pay the fees of his appeal.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news