UI - Skripsi (Membership) :: Kembali

UI - Skripsi (Membership) :: Kembali

Analisis yuridis penerapan Pasal 1367 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata dalam pertanggungjawaban rumah sakit swasta atas tindakan malpraktik medis yang dilakukan oleh dokter purnawaktu = Juridical analysis application of article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code in private hospital responsibility for medical malpractice committed by full time doctor

Nomor Panggil S44810
Pengarang
Pengarang lain/Kontributor
Subjek
Penerbitan [Place of publication not identified]: [Publisher not identified], 2013
Program Studi
 Abstrak
[ABSTRAK Skripsi ini membahas mengenai bagaimana di dalam praktek penerapan pasal 1367 KUH Perdata dalam pertanggungjawaban Rumah Sakit Swasta apabila dokter purnawaktu yang bekerja padanya melakukan suatu tindakan malpraktik medis. Pada praktiknya, penerapan pasal 1367 KUH Perdata tidaklah mutlak. Yang menjadi batasan adalah hak regres yang dimiliki oleh rumah sakit yang didasari oleh pasal 30 ayat (1) huruf e UU No. 44 tahun 2009 tentang Rumah Sakit. Adanya hak regres ini merupakan suatu penerapan hukum yang keliru karena hak regres tidak seharusnya berlaku di dalam lingkup hukum tentang harta kekayaan melainkan di dalam lingkup hukum ketenagakerjaan.
ABSTRACT This thesis discusses about how in practice the application of article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code in Private Hospital Responsibility if their full time doctor committed a medical malpractice. In fact, article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code can not be applied absolutely. The obstacle is the recourse right owned by the private hospital based on article 30 paragraph (1) letter e Law No. 44 of 2009 on Hospital (Hospital Law). The existence of the recourse right is a fallacy of the application of the law because the recourse right does not supposed to be applied within the scope of the law of property but within the scope of labor law., This thesis discusses about how in practice the application of article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code in Private Hospital Responsibility if their full time doctor committed a medical malpractice. In fact, article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code can not be applied absolutely. The obstacle is the recourse right owned by the private hospital based on article 30 paragraph (1) letter e Law No. 44 of 2009 on Hospital (Hospital Law). The existence of the recourse right is a fallacy of the application of the law because the recourse right does not supposed to be applied within the scope of the law of property but within the scope of labor law.]
 File Digital: 1
Shelf
 S 44810-Aria bahana Utama.pdf ::

Akses untuk anggota Perpustakaan Universitas Indonesia, silahkan

 Info Lainnya
Kode Bahasa : ind
Sumber Pengatalogan : LibUI ind rda
Tipe Konten : text
Tipe Media : unmediated ; computer
Tipe Carrier : volume ; online resource
Deskripsi Fisik : xiii, 277 pages : illustration ; 28 cm. + Appendix.
Catatan Bibliografi : pages. 182-186
Lembaga Pemilik : Universitas Indonesia
Lokasi : Perpustakaan UI, Lantai 3
  • Ketersediaan
  • Ulasan
  • Sampul
Nomor Panggil No. Barkod Ketersediaan
S44810 14-20-648417008 TERSEDIA
Ulasan:
Tidak ada ulasan pada koleksi ini: 20330845
[ABSTRAK
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai bagaimana di dalam praktek penerapan pasal 1367 KUH Perdata dalam pertanggungjawaban Rumah Sakit Swasta apabila dokter purnawaktu yang bekerja padanya melakukan suatu tindakan malpraktik medis. Pada praktiknya, penerapan pasal 1367 KUH Perdata tidaklah mutlak. Yang menjadi batasan adalah hak regres yang dimiliki oleh rumah sakit yang didasari oleh pasal 30 ayat (1) huruf e UU No. 44 tahun 2009 tentang Rumah Sakit. Adanya hak regres ini merupakan suatu penerapan hukum yang keliru karena hak regres tidak seharusnya berlaku di dalam lingkup hukum tentang harta kekayaan melainkan di dalam lingkup hukum ketenagakerjaan.

ABSTRACT
This thesis discusses about how in practice the application of article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code in Private Hospital Responsibility if their full time doctor committed a medical malpractice. In fact, article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code can not be applied absolutely. The obstacle is the recourse right owned by the private hospital based on article 30 paragraph (1) letter e Law No. 44 of 2009 on Hospital (Hospital Law). The existence of the recourse right is a fallacy of the application of the law because the recourse right does not supposed to be applied within the scope of the law of property but within the scope of labor law., This thesis discusses about how in practice the application of article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code in Private Hospital Responsibility if their full time doctor committed a medical malpractice. In fact, article 1367 Indonesian Civil Code can not be applied absolutely. The obstacle is the recourse right owned by the private hospital based on article 30 paragraph (1) letter e Law No. 44 of 2009 on Hospital (Hospital Law). The existence of the recourse right is a fallacy of the application of the law because the recourse right does not supposed to be applied within the scope of the law of property but within the scope of labor law.]