141 Union of Turkish Bar Associations Review 2022 Hacı KARA had undergone post-operative control. He claimed that when he went to the same hospital for the purpose of surgery, the defendant doctor learned that İbrahim had left the hospital, that he was interested in the treatment of another doctor in the same hospital, that he had permanent damage to his nose as a result of the wrong operation and that there was no possibility of recovery, that he could not work due to the wrong treatment and that he was deeply saddened. He requested the collection of material damages of TL 40,000.00 and non-pecuniary damages of TL 40,000.00 from the defendants with legal interest. In line with the forensic medicine report received, the court decided to reject the case on the grounds that there was no fault to be attributed to the defendants, and the judgment was appealed by the plaintiff. According to the decision of the appeal, the basis of the case is the contract of attorney and it is based on the breach of the duty of care. Pursuant to articles 386 et seq (TBK 502 and sequel) of the Code of Obligations, which regulates the power of attorney, although the attorney is not responsible for the failure to achieve the result he or she intended while performing the duty of attorney. He may be liable for the damages, arising from the lack of diligence in the transactions, actions, and behaviors of his efforts to achieve this result. The responsibility of the agent generally depends on the rules regarding the responsibility of the worker. He has to act diligently like a substitute worker and is responsible for even the slightest fault. (TBK art. 396/1) Therefore, all the faults of the doctor within his professional field, even if it is slight, should be accepted as an element of responsibility. In order for the patient not to be harmed, the doctor has to fulfill all professional requirements, determine the patient’s medical condition in a timely manner and without delay, take the necessary precautions in full, and determine and apply the appropriate treatment without delay. Even at the minimum level, he is obliged to carry out research to remove this hesitation and to take protective measures in the meantime, in cases of cause hesitation. While choosing between various treatment methods, the characteristics of the patient and the disease should be considered, attitudes and behaviors that would put him at risk should be avoided, and the safest way should be chosen. Indeed, the patient has the right to expect the surrogate, who is a professional doctor, to show meticulous care and attention at all stages of treatment. The attorney, who
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1