Volume 20, Issue 61 (4-2026)
MLJ 2026, 20(61): 212-225 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Karimi A, Mahdian M. Reassessment of the Duty of Disclosure in Medical Treatment Contracts. MLJ 2026; 20 (61) :212-225
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2024-en.html
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2024-en.html
1- Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:
Background and Aim: The duty to provide information in medical treatment contracts constitutes one of the most controversial issues in medical law, particularly because this duty is primarily raised at the pre-contractual stage and Iranian legislation has not explicitly determined its legal basis or enforcement mechanisms. Ambiguity in identifying the nature of this duty has cast doubt on the possibility of compensating damages arising from the failure of physicians or patients to disclose relevant information. The present study aims to clarify the legal basis of the duty to inform and to determine its position within medical treatment contracts.
Method: This study was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method based on library research, including the analysis of legal texts, statutory provisions and legal doctrines.
Ethical Considerations: All ethical principles applicable to library-based research, including originality of sources, academic honesty and scientific integrity, were fully observed.
Results: The findings indicate that the physician-patient relationship has a contractual nature and that, according to the theory of the general implications of contracts, all contracts inherently entail a duty of interaction. The duty to inform, as one of the fundamental manifestations of such interaction, applies to medical treatment contracts irrespective of whether the contract is classified as nominate or innominate and constitutes a reciprocal obligation. Accordingly, physicians are required to provide information essential for the patient’s informed decision-making, while patients are likewise obliged to disclose relevant information regarding their medical condition within reasonable limits.
Conclusion: Based on the duty of interaction, a physician’s breach of the duty to inform gives rise to contractual liability and contractual guarantee, with fault being presumed. Conversely, a patient’s failure to fulfill this duty may preclude a claim for damages. Therefore, the duty to inform in medical treatment contracts should be recognized as a binding contractual obligation.
Method: This study was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method based on library research, including the analysis of legal texts, statutory provisions and legal doctrines.
Ethical Considerations: All ethical principles applicable to library-based research, including originality of sources, academic honesty and scientific integrity, were fully observed.
Results: The findings indicate that the physician-patient relationship has a contractual nature and that, according to the theory of the general implications of contracts, all contracts inherently entail a duty of interaction. The duty to inform, as one of the fundamental manifestations of such interaction, applies to medical treatment contracts irrespective of whether the contract is classified as nominate or innominate and constitutes a reciprocal obligation. Accordingly, physicians are required to provide information essential for the patient’s informed decision-making, while patients are likewise obliged to disclose relevant information regarding their medical condition within reasonable limits.
Conclusion: Based on the duty of interaction, a physician’s breach of the duty to inform gives rise to contractual liability and contractual guarantee, with fault being presumed. Conversely, a patient’s failure to fulfill this duty may preclude a claim for damages. Therefore, the duty to inform in medical treatment contracts should be recognized as a binding contractual obligation.
Keywords: Duty to Inform, Medical Treatment Contract, General Implications of Contracts, Contractual Interaction, Physician’s Contractual Liability
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2025/09/17 | Accepted: 2026/02/7
Received: 2025/09/17 | Accepted: 2026/02/7
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
