[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, it is possible to appoint an expert independently, but the evidentiary value of the report will be limited. Before litigation, the patient has the right to appoint a medical association or a judicial appraisal institution with the corresponding qualifications to issue an appraisal opinion on their own; however, if the other party raises substantive objections and provides evidence during the litigation, the court may allow a supplementary appraisal or a reappraisal. In litigation, the appraisal institution shall be determined by both parties through consultation in accordance with the law. If no agreement can be reached, the People's Court shall designate it. The patient's unilateral selection cannot replace the statutory procedures. A prudent approach is to prioritize consultation on jointly appointing an appraisal institution, and if no agreement can be reached, to apply to the court for an appraisal during the litigation, and to promptly put forward opinions on the institution's qualifications and recusal matters. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for personal injury and medical disputes.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Is it possible for the patient's family to appoint their own appraisal institution? This is a frequently asked question in medical malpractice litigation. Typical scenarios include: family members wanting to unilaterally conduct appraisals to preserve evidence before negotiation; hospitals delaying negotiations or only recognizing institutions they have contacted themselves; mediation committees needing appraisal evidence but encountering a stalemate over the choice of institutions; unilateral commissioning of appraisals before litigation only to have them completely denied by the opposing party; and mistrust of institutions appointed through court mediation or random selection due to concerns about local protectionism. In different scenarios, the legality of the method of appointing institutions directly affects whether the appraisal opinion can be admitted as evidence. Choosing the wrong approach may result in wasted expenses and delayed opportunities. For more information on relevant procedural rules, please refer to the following sources:Legal services for personal injury and medical disputes.

II. Key points of dispute

There are four main points of contention. Firstly, the status of unilaterally commissioned opinions: opinions issued unilaterally before litigation are usually submitted as evidence in litigation, and after the opposing party cross-examines them, the court will review and judge them. They cannot automatically be used as the basis for making a judgment. Secondly, the conditions for re-appraisal: it must meet statutory circumstances such as the appraisal institution or personnel not having qualifications, serious procedural violations, or opinions obviously lacking sufficient basis. Simply not recognizing the conclusion is not enough to initiate re-appraisal. Thirdly, institutional qualification requirements: for cases focusing on clinical treatment errors, the appraisal institution should have qualifications in forensic clinical appraisal (medical damage appraisal). Fourthly, avoidance of conflicts of interest: if the appraisal institution has a vested interest in one party, the other party has the right to apply for its recusal. In the judicial practice of Beijing, in-court appraisals are often organized by the court through consultation between the parties or by drawing lots, with the process being open and there being very little room for unilateral appointments.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The medical malpractice case handled by Attorney Yu Dawei illustrates the importance of forensic institutions that can withstand scrutiny. On May 16, 2024, Zhao Dashan, an elderly patient, underwent a gastroscopic biopsy at A City Tumor Hospital for an esophageal cancer follow-up examination. He returned home after the procedure but suddenly suffered from vomiting blood and was rushed to B County People's Hospital for emergency treatment, before being transferred to the First Affiliated Hospital of C Medical University. He died on the afternoon of May 18. After the family entrusted Attorney Yu Dawei to sue the three hospitals, the attorney applied for a judicial appraisal of "medical negligence and causality," which concluded that B County People's Hospital was at fault and bore 50% responsibility for the "loss of survival opportunities." The defendant raised multiple objections, alleging that the appraisal institution lacked medical pathology qualifications, failed to provide expert information, and violated procedural rules, demanding a reappraisal. The appraisal institution responded to each objection, and the court ultimately ruled that the grounds for a reappraisal did not meet legal requirements, rejecting the request and adopting the appraisal opinion. The court also determined that the hospital should compensate according to a 50% liability ratio. This case highlights that only when forensic institutions meet legal procedures and possess sound qualifications and processes can their opinions withstand multiple rounds of scrutiny. If families hastily appoint appraisal institutions unilaterally before litigation or fail to seal medical records for cross-examination, the opinions are likely to be overturned and redone during trial, further delaying rights protection. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.Yu DayiThe lawyer (practice certificate number: 11101201010292290, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

The legal basis includes the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" (amended on December 25, 2019 and implemented on May 1, 2020) regarding the application for appraisal, the determination of appraisal institutions, the review of appraisal opinions, and the re-appraisal; the "Regulations on the Prevention and Handling of Medical Disputes" (State Council Decree No. 701, implemented on October 1, 2018) regarding the appraisal institutions and procedures for medical damage; the "General Procedures for Forensic Appraisal" (Ministry of Justice Decree No. 132, implemented on May 1, 2016) regarding the qualifications of appraisal institutions and the recusal of appraisers; and Article 121-8 of the "Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" (implemented on January 1, 2021) regarding the liability for medical damage. Action list: 1. Prioritize negotiating with the hospital to jointly commission an appraisal and confirm the name of the appraisal institution and the appraisal items in writing; 2. If it is necessary to commission an appraisal unilaterally, ensure that the medical records have been sealed and the materials are complete, and select an institution with qualifications for forensic clinical appraisal (medical damage appraisal); 3. If applying for an appraisal during litigation, actively cooperate with the court in the negotiation or random selection process, and promptly apply for the recusal of institutions with a conflict of interest; 4. If dissatisfied with the appraisal opinion, file a written objection in accordance with the law, and provide evidence regarding the qualifications, procedures, and legal basis. For more details, please refer to the relevant provisions.Legal services for personal injury and medical disputes.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

It's not prohibited for patients to entrust experts on their own, but don't treat it as conclusive evidence. The weakness of unilateral opinions lies in the process: the materials haven't been cross-examined by both parties, and there's a lack of constraints on the choice of institutions. If the other party claims that the process is unfair or the evidence is insufficient, it may undermine the probative force of the evidence. It's more effective to take precautions in advance, such as sealing the medical records, choosing the right institutions, and clarifying the relevant matters, than to take remedial measures afterwards. When handling similar cases in the Beijing area, it is recommended that patients prioritize the consultation or court-appointed procedures, and unilateral entrustment should only be used as a supplementary measure when time is pressing. For specific strategies, please consult professionals.Beijing Henglue Law FirmA professional lawyer.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the appraisal institution selected by the patient alone provides an opinion, will it be accepted?

It depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the other party's objections. The appraisal opinion commissioned unilaterally can be submitted as evidence. After cross-examination, the court will review and determine whether the institution has the appropriate qualifications, whether the procedure is legal, whether the basis is sufficient, and whether the other party has raised valid objections. If the other party raises substantive objections and can provide evidence of a lack of qualifications, illegal procedures, or insufficient basis, the court may require a supplementary appraisal or a new appraisal. In comparison, the opinions commissioned jointly by both parties or commissioned by the court during the litigation are generally more likely to be accepted. The conclusions of individual cases shall be subject to the review and determination of the court.

Q2: If I have doubts about the qualifications of the appraisal institution, what materials should I prepare?

The materials can be organized around four points: First, institutional qualification documents, including the judicial appraisal license and business scope, to confirm whether they include forensic clinical appraisal, medical damage appraisal, and the appraiser's practicing certificate; Second, clues of conflict of interest, such as public information on the institution's subordinate relationship, cooperation, or past business relations with hospitals; Third, evidence of procedural defects, such as the inspection materials not being subject to cross-examination by both parties, the appraiser not signing the report, and the absence of a hearing procedure; Fourth, comparison materials with insufficient basis, such as different appraisal conclusions in similar cases or authoritative literature. Objections should be submitted in writing within the statutory time limit and with clear specific reasons.

Q3: What is the approximate cost of a medical malpractice appraisal, and who bears the responsibility for it?

The fees are charged by the appraisal institutions according to the appraisal items and the complexity of the case. Standards vary from region to region, and the fees are generally between a few thousand yuan and tens of thousands of yuan, with no unified government pricing. Fees for appraisals commissioned by one party before litigation are borne by the commissioning party; fees applied for during litigation are prepaid by the applicant and ultimately borne by the losing party, with partial support being shared according to the liability ratio. The fees for reappraisals are also prepaid by the applicant first and then shared according to the results. It is recommended to confirm the fee items and refund rules before commissioning the appraisal and to calculate them together with the overall cost of the claim.

Q4: How long does it take from the time the agency receives the commission to provide feedback?

For cases initiated by a unilateral pre-litigation commission, opinions are generally issued within one to three months after the materials are handed over, and the timeframe may be longer for complex cases. For cases filed during litigation, the court organizes consultations or draws lots to determine the appraisal institution, which takes several weeks. The appraisal process takes one to three months, and there is an objection period after the opinion is issued. The review of objections and possible re-appraisals will further prolong the timeframe. Overall, for medical damage cases, the time from filing to the first-instance judgment typically ranges from six months to one and a half years, depending on the number of appraisals and the progress of the litigation.

Q5: If I want to unilaterally commission an appraisal, what should I do first?

There are four steps to proceed: First, seal and copy all medical records in writing to ensure that the appraisal materials are complete and the sources are undisputed; Second, inquire and verify the qualifications and business scope of the intended institutions to confirm that they have the ability to appraise medical damages; Third, when signing the entrustment agreement, clarify the appraisal items, including fault, causality, causation, as well as the list of inspection materials and the time limit for issuance; Fourth, after obtaining the opinion, comprehensively evaluate the possible objections of the other party and, if necessary, apply for an appraisal in litigation. For cases involving continuous medical treatment by multiple institutions, it is recommended to consult a professional lawyer before initiating the process.

The above Q&A is mainly based on judicial practices in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the interpretation of the law in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Personal injury legal services·Attorney Yuan Hang·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.