Healthcare and the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008

1. LITTLE MISS MUFFET
ADDRESSES THE SPIDER
Ahmore Burger-Smidt

2. INTRODUCTION
> In terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 68
of 2008 (“CPA”)
> all patients are considered as ‘consumers’ from a legal
perspective
> This means that patients also enjoy the rights of the consumer
> Health care practitioners may find themselves as ‘suppliers’
or ‘retailers’ as part of a supply chain and potentially liable
for harm and loss suffered by a patient in terms of the no-
fault liability provision
> Health care practitioners are within the chain that extends
from manufacturer to consumer
2

3. SCOPE OF THE ACT
> applies to every transaction occurring within South Africa
involving the supply of goods or services in exchange for
consideration, unless the transaction is exempted from the
application of the CPA
> Therefore the provision of a healthcare service to a patient in
exchange for remuneration and an expected positive
outcome would fall within the scope and ambit of the
definition of the term ‘transaction’ in the CPA
> The scope of the CPA is very wide, and if found to conflict
with other concurrent health care legislation (e.g. the Health
Professions Act or the Medical Schemes Act), the Act offering
the greater protection to the consumer will apply
3

4. FUNDAMENTAL DEFINITIONS
> ‘Consumer’ includes both a person who purchases goods or services and a person who
has entered into a transaction with a supplier in the ordinary course of the supplier’s
business. It is therefore apparent that the definition of ‘consumer’ includes a patient
> ‘Goods’, in terms of the CPA, includes anything marketed for human consumption and
would therefore include medicines, medical services and consumables
> ‘Service’ refers to, but is not limited to, work performed by a person for the direct or
indirect benefit of another, including the provision of information, advice or
consultation. Examples of a ‘service’ are a consultation with a health practitioner,
medical advice rendered by such a practitioner, or any medical intervention, such as an
operation. ‘Service’ further includes the undertaking, underwriting or assumption of
risk by one person on behalf of another. This would include medical scheme cover and
services provided under risk-sharing arrangements
> Patients are consumers and beneficiaries of services
4

5. FUNDAMENTAL CONSUMER RIGHTS
ESTABLISHED BY THE CPA
> the right of equality in the
consumer market
> the right to privacy
> the right to choose
> the right to disclosure and
information
> the right to fair and
responsible marketing
> the right to fair and honest
dealing
> the right to fair, just and
reasonable terms and
conditions
> the right to fair value, good
quality and safety
> the right to hold the
supplier accountable to
consumers
5

6. THE RIGHT OF EQUALITY IN THE
CONSUMER MARKET
> The CPA protects the patient against discriminatory marketing. This protection is
premised on the right to equality in the consumer market
> Differential treatment which constitutes unfair discrimination, may also not occur when
interacting with the consumer
> Decisions as to which persons to accept as patients and the level of fees to be charged,
should not be based on discriminatory grounds
> This may find expression in applying different standards in respect of benefit option
> to provide generic medicines to those medical scheme members on low-cost plans only
> relate to the decision to accept a person into a particular medical scheme, or to provide a
different quality of service to a category of patients, based on race or the ability to pay, or
to provide different levels of fees to certain categories of patient
6

7. THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE
> Bundling of goods and services
> The right of the consumer to select suppliers provides, inter alia, that a
supplier may not group or bundle goods by requiring that a consumer
buy goods or services from that supplier or enter into an additional
agreement or transaction with the same supplier or a designated third
party
> This would prevent, for example
> requiring to become a member of a medical scheme, a person must also
become a member of a loyalty programme from the same scheme, or
> requiring that a patient enters into a contract with a specific third party
(other health care provider) for the provision of a service that is available at a
lower cost from a different provider
7

8. THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE
> Patient’s right to cancel advance reservation, booking or order
> A patient has the right to cancel any advance booking reservation or order for services
to be supplied
> The doctor or hospital that makes such a commitment and accepts the reservation may
require payment of a reasonable deposit in advance and impose a reasonable charge for
cancellation of the reservation
> That fee cannot be imposed if the patient cannot honour the booking reservation because
of death or hospitalisation
> The cancellation charge is unreasonable if it exceeds a fair amount in the circumstances
having regard to the nature of the services, the length of the notice of cancellation, the
potential for the doctor or hospital acting diligently to find an alternative patient, and
the general practice of the relevant industry
8

9. THE RIGHT TO FAIR AND HONEST
DEALING
> Unconscionable conduct
> The consumer, who in terms of the CPA is entitled to the right to
fair and honest dealing, is also protected from ‘unconscionable
conduct’, which means improper or unethical conduct of such a
degree that it would shock the conscience of a reasonable
person
> It is also unconscionable for a supplier knowingly to take
advantage because a consumer is unable to protect his or her
own interests as a result of physical or mental disability,
illiteracy, ignorance, the inability to understand the language of
the agreement, or any similar factor
> This provision sets a very high standard for suppliers to ensure
that consumers understand agreements, particularly in the case
of vulnerable (and often uneducated or illiterate) consumers
9

10. THE RIGHT TO FAIR VALUE, GOOD
QUALITY AND SAFE GOODS
> Prior to the CPA medical malpractice suits were based on the
common law principles of negligence. The injured patient had
to prove that the doctor acted negligently in his provision of
care, and that this negligence resulted in injury
> This required that four legal elements be proven –
> a professional duty owed to the patient (duty to care)
> breach of such duty
> injury caused by the breach
> resulting damages
10

11. THE RIGHT TO FAIR VALUE, GOOD
QUALITY AND SAFE GOODS
> These common law principles conform to the provisions of the National
Health Act. However, the new CPA deviates from the common law and
the National Health Act
> Health care practitioners can now not only be sued for negligence that
resulted in harm to the patient, but also for supplying the patient with a
faulty product that led to harm or loss
> The CPA further states that a supplier of services, who in conjunction
with performing the said services, applies, supplies, installs or provides
access to any goods, is regarded as a supplier of those goods to the
consumer for the purpose of this provision. This provision may impose
strict liability on a range of health practitioners who supply, provide
access to, or implant prostheses or medical devices
> Class action
11

12. CONCLUSION
It is clear that the CPA has a far-reaching impact on the rights
of a patient in light of the fact that a patient is a consumer
under the CPA
12

13. THANK
YOU
23 July 2014
Legal notice: Nothing in this presentation should be construed as
formal legal advice from any lawyer or this firm. Readers are
advised to consult professional legal advisors for guidance on
legislation which may affect their businesses.
© 2014 Werksmans Incorporated trading as Werksmans Attorneys.
All rights reserved.