,LCR4802 MCQ
AND PAST
EXAMIANTION
QUESTION
PAPERS
medical law (University of South Africa)
, Q uestion 1 of 40
3 .0 Points
The om budsm an appointed by the H ealth Professions C ouncil of South
Africa m ust
in ter alia —
A. mediate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her for
mediation with a view to resolving such matters.
B. arbitrate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her for
arbitration with a view to resolving such matters.
C. investigate all complaints of unprofessional conduct by a
registered medical practitioner.
D. peruse and analyse all complaints received, categorise them
according to their significance and seriousness, and record each
complaint against the name of the respondent concerned as it
appears in the register.
Q uestion 2 of 40
3 .0 Points
The m ost im portant judgm ent on indem n ity clauses in hospital adm issions
form s is
Afrox Healthcare Bpk v Strydom 2002 (6 ) SA 21 (SC A). The C onsum er
Protection Act 68 of 2008 cam e in to force som e tim e after the Afrox case.
The provisions of th is Act changed the legal position to som e extent. W h
ich one of the fo llow ing statem ents is correct?
A. It is still unnecessary for a hospital (service provider) to draw
the patient‗s (consumer‗s) attention to an indemnity clause
contained in a hospital admissions form.
B. Since the coming into operation of the Consumer Protection Act 68
of 2008, an indemnity clause contained in a hospital admission form
is always null and void and unenforceable.
C. It is still uncertain whether an indemnity clause purporting to
exempt a hospital (service provider) from liability for any loss
attributable to the gross negligence of the hospital is valid and
enforceable.
D. Since the coming into operation of the Consumer Protection Act
68 of 2008, an indemnity clause purporting to exempt a hospital
(service provider) from liability for any loss attributable to gross
negligence on its part is void to the extent that it contravenes the
provisions of the Act.
Q uestion 3 of 40
3 .0 Points
C larke v Hurst NO 1992 (4 ) SA 630 (D ) confirm s that
passive euthanasia—
A. cannot, in law, be regarded as the cause of the patient‗s
AND PAST
EXAMIANTION
QUESTION
PAPERS
medical law (University of South Africa)
, Q uestion 1 of 40
3 .0 Points
The om budsm an appointed by the H ealth Professions C ouncil of South
Africa m ust
in ter alia —
A. mediate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her for
mediation with a view to resolving such matters.
B. arbitrate in the case of minor transgressions referred to him or her for
arbitration with a view to resolving such matters.
C. investigate all complaints of unprofessional conduct by a
registered medical practitioner.
D. peruse and analyse all complaints received, categorise them
according to their significance and seriousness, and record each
complaint against the name of the respondent concerned as it
appears in the register.
Q uestion 2 of 40
3 .0 Points
The m ost im portant judgm ent on indem n ity clauses in hospital adm issions
form s is
Afrox Healthcare Bpk v Strydom 2002 (6 ) SA 21 (SC A). The C onsum er
Protection Act 68 of 2008 cam e in to force som e tim e after the Afrox case.
The provisions of th is Act changed the legal position to som e extent. W h
ich one of the fo llow ing statem ents is correct?
A. It is still unnecessary for a hospital (service provider) to draw
the patient‗s (consumer‗s) attention to an indemnity clause
contained in a hospital admissions form.
B. Since the coming into operation of the Consumer Protection Act 68
of 2008, an indemnity clause contained in a hospital admission form
is always null and void and unenforceable.
C. It is still uncertain whether an indemnity clause purporting to
exempt a hospital (service provider) from liability for any loss
attributable to the gross negligence of the hospital is valid and
enforceable.
D. Since the coming into operation of the Consumer Protection Act
68 of 2008, an indemnity clause purporting to exempt a hospital
(service provider) from liability for any loss attributable to gross
negligence on its part is void to the extent that it contravenes the
provisions of the Act.
Q uestion 3 of 40
3 .0 Points
C larke v Hurst NO 1992 (4 ) SA 630 (D ) confirm s that
passive euthanasia—
A. cannot, in law, be regarded as the cause of the patient‗s
