Whether receipt of unauthorized patient payments by a public health official constitutes an exercise of a legal right exempting criminal liability
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice, sitting as the Full Bench for Resolving Questions of Law in Criminal Matters, established a binding legal principle by holding that the act of a public health system doctor possessing the status of a public official in receiving additional payments or donations from patients does not constitute the exercise of a right recognized by law, thereby excluding the application of the criminal liability exemption under Article 21, paragraph 1, first sentence of the Penal Code. This decision resolved a preliminary question referred by the Court of Military Appeal regarding whether such conduct by a medical doctor, defined as a public official under Article 175, paragraph 1, literal b, second sentence of the Penal Code, in violation of Article 34, paragraph 2 of Law No. 46/2003 concerning patient rights, could be shielded by the legal defense of exercising a recognized right. The ruling clarifies that no statutory immunity or defense attaches to the receipt of unauthorized financial benefits by public health officials, mandating that such acts remain subject to criminal prosecution without the mitigation of Article 21 of the Penal Code.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart.477 alin.(3) Cod procedură penală; Whether receipt of unauthorized patient payments by a public health official constitutes an exercise of a legal right exempting criminal liability: This decision resolved a preliminary question referred by the Court of Military Appeal regarding whether such conduct by a medical doctor, defined as a public official under Article 175, paragraph 1, literal b, second sentence of the Penal Code, in violation of Article 34, paragraph 2 of Law No. 46/2003 concerning patient rights, could be shielded by the legal defense of exercising a recognized right. The ruling clarifies that no statutory immunity or defense attaches to the receipt of unauthorized financial benefits by public health officials, mandating that such acts remain subject to criminal prosecution without the mitigation of Article 21 of the Penal Code.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedProcedural rule cited to establish the binding nature and effective date of the decision upon publication in the Official Monitor.
Full text
R O M Â N I A
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT ÎN
MATERIE PENALĂ
Minuta deciziei nr.19 Dosar nr. 1151/1/2015
Şedinţa din 4 iunie 2015
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE
Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea Militară de Apel, în dosarul nr. 34/753/2013 prin care se solicită pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea de principiu a problemei de drept: „dacă fapta medicului, care are calitatea de funcţionar public, de a primi plăţi suplimentare sau donaţii de la pacienţi, în condiţiile art.34 alin.2 din Legea nr.46/2003 privind drepturile pacientului, constituie sau nu o exercitare a unui drept recunoscut de lege, având ca urmare incidenţa dispoziţiilor art. 21 alin.1 teza I din C.pen.”.
Stabileşte că fapta medicului din sistemul public de sănătate, care are calitatea de funcţionar public, în accepţiunea dispoziţiilor art.175 alin.1 lit. b teza a-ll-a din Codul penal, de a primi plăţi suplimentare sau donaţii de la pacienţi, în sensul art.34 alin.2 din Legea nr.46/2003 privind drepturile pacientului, nu constituie o exercitare a unui drept recunoscut de lege care să atragă incidenţa dispoziţiilor art.21 alin.1 teza I-a din Codul penal.
Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art.477 alin.(3) Cod procedură penală.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 04 iunie 2015.