514 KB0 KB201320262026Koritnik, BoštjanSamec Berghaus, Natašaštevilka:3/4letnik:81str. 161-194, 285-286ISSN:0032-6976COBISSID_HOST:279084547URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-35SL2IA2slZveza društev pravnikov SlovenijePravnikartificial intelligenceburden of proofdokazno bremeduty to explainhealthcarejoint and several liabilityliability for damagesmedical standardsmedicinski standardobjektivna odgovornostodškodninska odgovornostpojasnilna dolžnostsolidarna odgovornoststrict liabilityterapevtska svobodatherapeutic freedomumetna inteligencazdravstvoRazpletanje vozla civilne odgovornosti v zdravstvu ob uporabi umetne inteligence|The article examines civil liability in healthcare arising from the use of robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) and shows how digitalisation is reshaping traditional questions of medical negligence, the duty to inform, and the burden of proof. Its central thesis is that, in principle, Slovenian law reveals no specific liability gap inherent in AI: the core doctrines of contractual and tortious liability, employer liability for the acts of healthcare staff, and product liability remain applicable even in digitised forms of treatment. AI nevertheless significantly intensifies practical difficulties, particularly in proving causation and allocating liability across the chain of actors involved (the doctor, the healthcare institution, the manufacturer, the developer, and the provider responsible for maintenance and updates), while the opacity of algorithmic decision-making further complicates matters (the “black box” effect). The article first highlights the structural weaknesses of the Slovenian healthcare system, particularly the inadequate recording of safety incidents and the lack of uniform clinical guidelines, and considers how these deficiencies are reflected in compensation litigation. It then analyses the legal permissibility of the use of AI through the lens of therapeutic freedom and medical standards, emphasising that the duty to inform is particularly demanding when new methods are used. Finally, the article considers possible de lege ferenda solutions, in particular whether the application of strict liability and joint and several liability is justified in cases where, owing to technological and organisational complexity, the liable party cannot be identified with sufficient certaintyPrispevek obravnava civilnopravno (odškodninsko) odgovornost v zdravstvu ob uporabi robotike in umetne inteligence (UI) ter pokaže, kako digitalizacija preoblikuje klasična vprašanja zdravniške napake, pojasnilne dolžnosti in dokazovanja. Osrednja teza je, da slovenski pravni okvir načeloma ne kaže posebne »vrzeli« odgovornosti, ki bi bila inherentna UI: temeljni instituti (pogodbena in deliktna odgovornost, odgovornost zdravstvenega zavoda za ravnanje zaposlenih ter odgovornost proizvajalcev za proizvode z napako) ostajajo uporabni tudi v digitaliziranih oblikah zdravljenja. UI pa bistveno zaostri praktične probleme – zlasti dokazovanje vzročne zveze in razmejitev odgovornosti v verigi sodelujočih subjektov (zdravnik, zdravstvena ustanova, proizvajalec, razvijalec in vzdrževalec posodobitev), pri čemer je dodatna težava nepreglednost odločanja (učinek »črne škatle«). Avtorja najprej poudarita strukturne slabosti slovenskega zdravstvenega sistema (zlasti pomanjkljivo evidentiranje varnostnih incidentov in neenotnost kliničnih smernic) ter njihov odsev v pravdnem uveljavljanju odškodnin. Nato analizirata dopustnost uporabe UI skozi prizmo terapevtske svobode in medicinskega standarda ter poudarita, da je pojasnilna dolžnost pri novih metodah posebej zahtevna. Avtorja razpravljata o možnostih razvoja de lege ferenda, zlasti o utemeljenosti uporabe pravil objektivne ter solidarne odgovornosti v primerih, ko zaradi kompleksnosti tehnologije in organizacije ni mogoče zanesljivo identificirati odgovorne osebeTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaUniverza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta