Methods of Proving Medical Fault and the Burden of Proof in Yemeni Law and Islamic Jurisprudence

Abstract

This research used a comparative analytical approach to examine the methods of proving medical malpractice and the burden of proof in Yemeni law and Islamic jurisprudence. The study included two main sections: The first section addressed the methods of proving medical malpractice, dividing them into two categories: Proving ordinary errors through means such as testimony, confession, circumstantial evidence, and written documents. Proving technical errors, which primarily rely on judicial expertise. The second section discussed the burden of proof for medical malpractice, highlighting it as the biggest challenge for the affected patient, especially in cases of technical errors. In conclusion, the research reached several key findings. Most notably, a medical error is considered a physical act that can be proven by all available means, and judicial expertise is an essential tool for technical errors. At the end of the study, the researcher made several recommendations, including activating the role of specialized medical committees, establishing clear standards for medical errors, and enhancing electronic medical documentation.