Source: http://arzthaftungsra.de/en/bei-fehlen-einer-gesetzlichen-krankenversicherung-bleibt-der-patient-im-wesentlichen-kostenschuldner-nach-%C2%A7%C2%A7-10-ff-bpflv/
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 11:18:35+00:00

Document:
Patients) closed the contract of employment.
BGB § 242 Bb, Bd; § 313 Abs. 2 n.F.
of the Higher Regional Court Koblenz of the 20. July 2004 lifted.
Base rate since 23. January 2002 to pay.
the granting of the regular benefit in the hospital.
Self-payer is obliged to pay the fees for these services.
The then husband of the defendant had brought in the child.
Daughter in the year 2000 is the plaintiff according to § 1357 BGB.
the claimant continues to pay.
and to remit the case to the Court of Appeal.
the defendant has to bear the hospital costs can not be determined.
Although there may have been a regulatory gap in the treatment contract.
take. Because she was not able to pay for lack of own income.
without order (§§ 683, 670 BGB) are excluded.
The appeal judgment does not stand up to the legal examination.
(§ 611 para. 1 BGB).
110; BSGE 70, 20, 22 f und BSG NJW-RR 1998, 273, 274).
Health insurance coverage for the daughter of the defendant does not exist.
as a self-payer obliged to pay a fee for these services.
(§ 5 AGBG in conjunction with Art. 229 § 5 sentence 1 EGBGB) at the expense of the user of the GTC, ie the plaintiff, to go out.
a regulatory gap - an incompleteness contrary to plan - provided (cf.
a payment obligation of the defendant - actually have regulated.
a claim for payment by the claimant against the defendant.
12. Edition 1989 § 823 App. II Rn. 7; Steffen / Dressler, Medical Liability 9. Ed.
Rn. 8; German / Spickhoff, Medical Law 5. Edition 2003 Rn. 81 and 563).
to ensure the insurance cover of the patient.
to arrange the necessary and to teach the hospital-bearer correctly.
(2) The contract adaptation must follow the legal requirements.
Treatment of her daughter to pay the uniform care rate.
unless otherwise provided by the circumstances.
who accompanied the child to hospitalization.
caused hospital treatment can not be denied.
of the family (BGHZ 116, 184, 186 f).
an die “angemessene Deckung des Lebensbedarfs der Familie” gebunden worden.
to turn off the family as it appears outwardly.
2004 – III ZR 213/03 – NJW 2004, 1593, 1594).
by focusing solely on the lack of resources of the defendant.
something else results, lies with the defendant.

References: § 242
 § 313
 § 1357
 Art. 229
 § 5
 § 823