Search

Background/Aims This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-related adverse events (AEs) that eventually lead to medical disputes or claims on medical professional liability. Methods Medical disputes for ERCP/EUS-related AEs filed in the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency between April 2012 and August 2020 were evaluated using corresponding medical records. AEs were categorized into three sections: procedure-related, sedation-related, and safety-related AEs. Results Among a total of 34 cases, procedure-related AEs were 26 (76.5%; 12 duodenal perforations, 7 post-ERCP pancreatitis, 5 bleedings, 2 perforations combined with post-ERCP pancreatitis); sedation-related AEs were 5 (14.7%; 4 cardiac arrests, 1 desaturation), and safety-related AEs were 5 (8.8%; 1 follow-up loss for stent removal, 1 asphyxia, 1 fall). Regarding clinical outcomes, 20 (58.8%) were fatal and eventually succumbed to AEs. For the types of medical institutions, 21 cases (61.8%) occurred at tertiary or academic hospitals, and 13 (38.2%) occurred at community hospitals. Conclusions The ERCP/EUS-related AEs filed in Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency showed distinct features: duodenal perforation was the most frequent AE, and clinical outcomes were fatal, resulting in at least more than permanent physical impairment.

RETRACTION:Date of retraction: 02.11.2018Reason for retraction: Duplicate publication in several editions Additional information about the causes of retraction: The article was retracted by the decision of the editors in connection with the discovery of the fact of violation of publication ethics by the author, namely duplication of publications: (Olkov S.G. Mathematical models of the system of law, legal relationship and legal responsibility // Public and private law. 2015. No. 2 (26). P. 101-111).

Sometimes in building and construction projects, the sub-contractor may bring a claim made by the main contractor or the employer against the contractor, and then the latter will often seek to settle this claim. The case "John F Hunt Demolition Ltd v ASME Engineering Ltd [2007] EWHC 1507 (TCC)" , which was under the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT), provides an example of this situation when the contractor (as sub-contractor in this case) settles the employer’s or main contractor’s claim, and then claims against his sub-contractor (as sub-subcontractor in this case) to recover these sums. This research is undertaken to discuss contractual issues connected to the above mentioned case, and to appraise the legal liabilities that associated with its contractual failure, and then it will appraise those liabilities under the NEC3 form of contract in order to enhance an interpretation of the NEC contracts and provide evaluation of legal implications under different legal provisions.