[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, if a doctor causes harm to a patient through multi-point practice, the actual medical institution providing treatment shall, in principle, bear the liability for compensation to the patient first. According to Article 121 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, if a patient suffers harm during the treatment process and the medical institution or its medical staff are at fault, the medical institution shall bear the liability for compensation; Article 122 requires medical staff to fulfill the treatment obligations corresponding to the current medical level. Patients can directly sue the hospital providing treatment, and the hospital can, after making compensation, recover the compensation from the inviting institutions or the doctors involved in accordance with the multi-point practice agreement or the fault. It is recommended to seal the medical records and fix the information of the practice registration as soon as possible, and to assert rights within the three-year statute of limitations. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for personal injury and medical disputes.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

With the implementation of the registration system for physicians practicing in multiple institutions, it has become increasingly common for experts to "go out" to perform surgeries and provide consultations, which has also led to an increase in disputes. Typical scenarios include: patients undergoing surgery by experts from other hospitals in private hospitals, but suffering harm after the surgery and not knowing whom to sue; the inviting party and the registered party shirking responsibility, claiming that "the surgeon is not our employee"; surgeries being performed by individual physicians without registering for multi-point practice, making it extremely difficult to obtain evidence; and medical records being kept by two different institutions, resulting in missing pages and alterations. When handling similar cases in Beijing, the court usually first examines where the patient received treatment and who compiled the medical records, before determining the compensation subject and liability ratio. For cases involving disability ratings and labor capacity assessments, relevant evidence can be combined with the medical records to determine liability.Labor arbitration and legal services for work-related injury compensationCoordinated assessment.

II. Key points of dispute

The focus of the dispute centers on three aspects. Firstly, the subject of liability: the medical institutions that actually provide medical treatment shall bear the compensation liability, and cannot use the argument that "the surgeon is an expert from another hospital" to oppose the patients' claims. Secondly, compliance with professional practice: whether the doctor has registered to practice in multiple institutions in accordance with the law directly affects the evaluation of the medical institution's management faults and compensation recovery. Thirdly, fault and causality: whether the damage is caused by surgical complications, the development of the patient's own disease, or medical treatment errors, all of which require reliance on medical damage appraisal to determine the degree of involvement. In practice, patients should not allow the argument of "finding the wrong person" to dilute their claims. They should first list the receiving hospital as the defendant, and then seek compensation from within the hospital to avoid having their claims dismissed due to incorrect selection of the subject of liability. Where contractual agreements between institutions are involved, reference can be made to relevant provisions.Legal services for corporate commercial and contract disputesClarify the basis for sharing responsibilities.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Based on practical observations in handling medical malpractice cases, the most common pitfalls in multi-practice disputes lie in the determination of the responsible party and the burden of proof. According to the "institutional liability" principle established in Article 1,218 of the Civil Code, patients do not need to individually prove which doctor performed the treatment, as long as they can demonstrate that they received medical treatment at the medical institution and suffered harm, and that the medical institution or its staff were at fault. According to Article 1,212, if the medical institution conceals, refuses to provide, or loses, falsifies, or alters medical records, it is presumed to be at fault, which alleviates the burden of proof for patients. Henglue Lawyers typically recommend the following: 1. Require a copy and seal of all medical records (including surgical records, anesthesia sheets, and informed consent forms) immediately after the incident, and verify the surgeon's practice registration and authorization documents. 2. Apply for a medical malpractice appraisal as soon as possible to determine the compensation base based on fault and involvement. 3. Sue both the inviting party and the registered party together or apply for additional litigation to prevent subsequent evasion of responsibility. 4. The scope of compensation, according to Article 1,179 of the Civil Code, includes reasonable expenses such as medical fees, loss of income, nursing care fees, disability compensation, and compensation for mental distress.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The core basis is Article 121-8 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective from January 1, 2021), which governs liability for medical treatment damages; Article 122-1, which stipulates the liability for failure to fulfill medical obligations; Article 122-2, which outlines three presumptions of fault; Article 179-11, which defines the scope of compensation for personal injuries; and Article 183-3, which pertains to compensation for mental distress; as well as the provisions of the Physician Law of the People's Republic of China (effective from March 1, 2022) regarding the registration and management of physicians practicing in multiple institutions. Supporting documents include the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trials of Medical Damage Liability Disputes (amended on December 29, 2020 and effective from January 1, 2021). Practical advice includes: retaining registration, payment, and informed consent documents during medical visits; promptly copying and sealing medical records after surgery; verifying the practicing registration of the lead surgeon; applying for a medical damage appraisal to clarify fault and contributory negligence; and suing the receiving medical institution in a court with jurisdiction within the three-year statute of limitations, with the option of adding the inviting party as a defendant if necessary. For cases involving obstacles to the enforcement of compensation payments, legal remedies can be pursued accordingly.Legal services for creditor-debtor relations and enforcement casesProtect rights and interests.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

Multiple practice locations do not equate to a transfer of responsibility. Patients don't need to agonize over "which hospital to choose". It's usually safer to sue the actual treating institution first. Special attention should be paid to three types of risks: First, the medical records are kept separately by two institutions, and there may be omissions or alterations. It's necessary to seal them as soon as possible; Second, trusting the verbal promise of "individual responsibility of experts" without leaving written evidence; Third, missing the three-year statute of limitations for litigation or failing to conduct appraisals in time, resulting in the inability to determine the fault and participation of all parties. If there is an agreement on sharing liability among the involved institutions, it belongs to an internal relationship and does not affect the patient's external claims. It is recommended to involve professional lawyers as early as possible in the evidence preservation and appraisal process, fully calculate the scope of compensation, and avoid reducing the scope of compensation due to procedural omissions. For an assessment, you can contact us through the following channels:Special services and legal services for other casesObtain support.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If a doctor causes damage through multi-point practice, can the patient win the lawsuit against the hospital?

The success of the lawsuit depends on fault, causality, and evidence, rather than the form of medical practice. According to Article 1,218 of the Civil Code, patients only need to prove that they received medical treatment at a medical institution and suffered harm, and that the medical institution or its medical staff were at fault, in order to claim compensation; Article 1,218 also stipulates that if the medical institution conceals, refuses to provide, or loses, falsifies, or alters the medical records, it is presumed to be at fault. Therefore, as long as the complete medical records can be fixed and the fault and involvement are confirmed through medical damage appraisal, the likelihood of winning the compensation will be significantly increased. Conversely, if the harm is caused by unavoidable complications or the development of the patient's own condition, the medical institution may be exempt from liability or only bear a low proportion of responsibility. It is recommended to complete the appraisal and evaluation before suing and rationally judge the value of the lawsuit.

Q2: For claiming medical malpractice in multiple practice locations, what evidence do patients need to prepare?

The core evidence includes: registration forms, payment receipts, and medical records (to prove the doctor-patient relationship); hospitalization records, surgical records, anesthesia records, nursing records, and informed consent forms (to prove the medical treatment process); the attending surgeon's professional registration and authorization materials (to prove the fact of multi-point practice); imaging materials and original examination reports (to facilitate comparison of errors); bills for medical expenses, loss of income, and nursing care (to determine the losses); and follow-up treatment and disability appraisal opinions (to determine the compensation items). The evidence should focus on the four points of "doctor-patient relationship - fault - damage - causality". It is particularly crucial to seal the pre- and post-operative imaging and medical records. If any materials are missing, the court can be applied to retrieve them. It is not advisable to give up claims just because the evidence is scattered.

Q3: For handling multi-point practice medical disputes, what are the approximate costs of attorney fees and litigation fees?

The litigation fees shall be paid in accordance with the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Costs", which are calculated cumulatively based on the amount of compensation requested. The losing party shall bear the fees, and the winning party shall share the fees in proportion to the extent of its victory and defeat. In medical malpractice cases, there are usually additional expenses for appraisal fees, which are generally paid in advance by the applicant and ultimately shared in proportion to the responsibility. There are no unified government standards for attorney's fees. They are usually charged on a per-case basis, a percentage of the total amount, or on an hourly basis, subject to the terms of the contract. In civil and commercial cases involving personal injury, it is prohibited to stipulate risk-based fees in violation of regulations, and the fee charging standards must be followed. It is recommended to first estimate the amount of compensation that can be obtained, and then weigh it against the appraisal fees, litigation fees, and attorney's fees to avoid pursuing small disputes at high costs.

Q4: How long does it usually take for such medical malpractice lawsuits to reach a conclusion?

The duration of the process depends on the progress of the appraisal and the proceedings. In civil litigation, the first-instance ordinary procedure is generally concluded within six months, and the summary procedure is concluded within three months. However, medical malpractice cases usually require a preliminary medical malpractice appraisal, which often takes several months. Overall, it often takes more than half a year from the filing of the case to the first-instance judgment. If the appellant is not satisfied with the first-instance judgment and appeals, the second-instance procedure generally takes three months. After the judgment takes effect, if the other party fails to perform its obligations, it is necessary to apply for enforcement. It is recommended to apply for property preservation in parallel during the litigation to prevent the subject of the compensation obligation from transferring assets, and to prepare sufficient appraisal materials before suing to shorten the actual waiting time.

Q5: If I suffer losses due to a doctor's practice in multiple hospitals, what should I do first?

It is recommended to proceed in four steps: First, immediately request medical institutions to copy and jointly seal all medical records, including surgical records, anesthesia forms, and informed consent forms, at fixed time points; Second, verify the multi-practice registration and authorization of the lead surgeon to determine the actual institution providing medical treatment; Third, organize registration and payment receipts, expense invoices, and follow-up treatment records, and apply for medical damage appraisal in a timely manner to clarify the fault and degree of participation; Fourth, within the three-year statute of limitations, sue the actual receiving hospital as the defendant in a court with jurisdiction, and if necessary, add the inviting party as a co-defendant. Throughout the process, keep records of communication and negotiations, consult professional lawyers as soon as possible to design a litigation path, and avoid the loss of evidence and errors in subject selection.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The judicial interpretations in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

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

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open 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 a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.