She demanded compensation of 50,000 dirhams

A woman is suing a hospital and a doctor for publishing a video of her birth

Al-Ain Primary School rejected the case and obligated the plaintiff to pay the expenses.

archival

A woman filed a lawsuit before the Al Ain Court of First Instance, in which she demanded that a hospital and an obstetrician who works in it, jointly or severally, be obligated to pay her a compulsory compensation of 50 thousand dirhams, in addition to fees and expenses and in return for attorney’s fees, for the material, moral and moral damage that occurred to her, as a result of publishing Videos of her on the “Instagram” platform, during a childbirth operation that she performed, by the doctor who performed the operation on her (the second defendant), without her consent to publish the videos.

The plaintiff confirmed that the publication of the videos caused her several damages that prompted her to file a lawsuit, and provided support for her claim, a photocopy of the medical report, and the photos published on the “Instagram” site.

The case was initially discussed before the case management office, in which the plaintiff’s attorney was prepared, and the representative of the first defendant (the hospital) was prepared, and the second defendant attended in person (the doctor) through one of the programs designated for that, and the attendant submitted on behalf of the first defendant a reply memorandum to The lawsuit, at its conclusion, requested the dismissal of the lawsuit, while the attendant submitted on behalf of the plaintiff a commentary memorandum on the lawsuit, at the end of which he repeated his previous requests, enclosing documents that were reviewed by the court. Case dismissed.

The court stated, on the plaintiff’s request, to compel the first and second defendants, jointly or severally, to pay the plaintiff compensation for material, moral and moral damage in the amount of 50 thousand dirhams, based on the fact that the second defendant published pictures of the operation that was performed for her inside the hospital of the first defendant, without Her approval and permission for them to film, it is decided that responsibility - whether contractual or tort - is only achieved by the availability of its three pillars of error, damage, and a causal relationship linking them, so that if one of them is absent, liability is also excluded, just as extracting the availability of the error or default that leads to responsibility or its denial It is one of the issues of reality that fall within the authority of the subject matter court without commenting on it, as long as it is permissible to extract it.

And she explained that since the incident for which the plaintiff is asking for compensation did not provide conclusive evidence, and documents indicating fabrication by the two defendants, as she did not provide anything indicating that these pictures belonged to her, nor did she provide anything indicating the existence of a criminal judgment condemning the two defendants for the incident. Filming, which is the act for which compensation is claimed, and then it is not possible to cut off the verification of the element of error on the part of the defendants until the rest of the elements of tort liability are examined, and with the collapse of the element of error the rest of the elements of liability collapse, and her request for this has come without a valid support from reality and law, The court shall dismiss the case and oblige the plaintiff to pay the expenses.

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