DEFAMATION IN THE FIELD OF HEALTH CARE: COLLEGIALITY OF DOCTORS VS. CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF DOCTORS' ACTIVITIES

Abstract

The concept of defamation and the composition of defamation tort are analyzed. Foreign experience and judicial practice of defamation application are given. The need to uphold the principle of ensuring a balance between the constitutional right to freedom of thought and speech, the right to free expression of one’s views and beliefs, on the one hand, and the right to respect for human dignity, constitutional guarantees of non-interference in private and family life, judicial protection of the right to rebuttal inaccurate personal information, on the other. The defamation balance between medical collegiality and critical assessment of doctors' activity is formulated. A «defamatory balance» has been formed between the collegiality of doctors and the critical evaluation of doctors' activities, which will be achieved by the preemptive right to freedom of expression to protect the lives and health of patients, actions in the public interest in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.