THE SAFETY MEASURE OF PROHIBITING TO EXERCISE A PROFESSION, IMPOSED BY THE COURT IN CASE OF MAL PRAXIS, MAY ENVISAGE THE PROFESSION OF DOCTOR IN THE WIDER SENSE (AS A WHOLE) OR ONLY THE SPECIALTY THAT OCCASIONED THE COMMITTING OF THE OFFENCE PROVIDED IN THE CRIMINAL LAW

The present paper examines the possibility for the courts of law to order, in case of medical malpractice, the safety measure of prohibiting to exercise the profession of doctor in the wider sense, or only the specialty that occasioned the committing of the offence provided in the criminal law, analyzing the judicial practice regarding this issue. In accordance with Article 450 paragraph (2) of Law no. 95/2006, “disciplinary liability of doctors does not exclude criminal, tort or civil liability”. Between the regulation contained in Article 450 paragraph (2) of Law no. 95/2006 and the safety measure of prohibiting to exercise the profession of doctor, as criminal penalty, there is a close connection, within the meaning that the special law, in particular Law no. 95/2006 derogates from the general criminal law, in particular Article 111 of the Criminal Code in connection with the prohibition of exercising the medical profession. The disciplinary penalties that may be imposed against doctors for mal praxis are listed in Article 455 of Law no. 95/2006. Article 455 letter (e) sets out, as disciplinary penalty which may be imposed against doctors “the prohibition to exercise the profession or certain medical activities” for a period ranging between one month and one year. Comparing the provisions of Article 455 letter (e) of Law no. 95/2006 with the provisions of Article 111 of the Criminal Code, it may be noticed that the scope of disciplinary accountability of the doctor having committed the civil mal praxis is more comprehensive than the scope of the safety measure imposed by the criminal court