A patient was ordered by the Civil Court of First Instance in Dubai to pay a hospital 277,000 dirhams for treatment that spanned 22 days.
The hospital demands payment
The Civil Court of First Instance in Dubai has issued a ruling requiring a patient to pay 277,000 dirhams to a hospital for the medical services provided to him over a 22-day period. The court declined to involve the patient's insurance company in the lawsuit, citing the hospital's failure to consult the insurance company or obtain the patient's approval for all services before rendering them.
Dispute Background
The case originated from a hospital's demand for payment from a patient and their insurance company for medical treatment amounting to 277,331 dirhams. Following unsuccessful attempts at reaching a resolution through the Center for Friendly Settlement of Disputes, the matter was brought before the civil court.
According to the hospital's lawsuit, the patient had been admitted for over 40 days, during which the hospital administered medical care, tests, and services. However, the patient's insurance company only covered the expenses for 18 days, amounting to 115,048 dirhams. The hospital sought payment for the remaining 22 days of treatment. Despite the patient's refusal to pay the outstanding amount, the insurance company did not fulfill its obligation, despite acknowledging responsibility for covering treatment costs.
In its defense, the hospital provided documentation, including a hospital admission declaration signed by the patient and bearing the insurance company's name, though not accompanied by the patient's signature, along with an invoice and other supporting documents.
The patient's legal representative submitted a memorandum asserting the patient's health insurance coverage and his complaint against the insurance company for non-payment.
The expert's report confirmed the patient's admission to the hospital and receipt of necessary medical services covered by insurance. However, it noted the hospital's failure to provide evidence of its communication with the insurance company or the patient regarding coverage for the services rendered. Despite the expert's request, the hospital did not furnish documentation justifying the costs incurred.
The court examined the hospital's and patient's submissions along with the expert's report. It rejected the hospital's request to include the insurance company as a party to the lawsuit, citing the absence of evidence of the insurance company's commitment or acknowledgment of the debt. Additionally, the court denied the patient's request to suspend proceedings pending resolution of the insurance dispute, ruling that the outcome of the insurance dispute would not impact the current case. Consequently, the patient was ordered to settle the outstanding debt.
