ghly specialised neurosurgical institutions. Radical surgical treatment with ablation of all the affected areas is impossible because of the amplitude of the lesion. It is recommended that the patient be supervised by a surgeon and, in case of haemorrhage, stitching of angiomatous tissues."
52. On 30 January 2006, upon studying the applicant's medical file, the Moscow State Medical-Stomatological University refused to accept him for treatment.
53. On 15 February 2006 the Ministry of Justice informed the administration of prison YaV-48/T-1 that the applicant could be placed for treatment in the Krasnoyarsk Regional Hospital. The prison administration requested an order for his transfer.
54. On 20 May 2006 the Ministry of Justice replied that the order could be granted only upon confirmation from the Krasnoyarsk Regional Hospital that it would accept the applicant for treatment.
55. On 14 July 2006 the Krasnoyarsk Regional Hospital replied that it could not accept the applicant since it did not have the technical facilities for the treatment required.
56. From 26 October 2006 to 20 March 2007 the applicant underwent treatment for tuberculosis in penitentiary hospital IK-3.
57. On 27 February 2007 the Tyumen Regional Hospital informed the penitentiary authorities, in reply to their request, that it could not provide treatment to the applicant given the absence of the necessary technical facilities.
58. Following the applicant's transfer to prison No. T-2 in the Vladimir Region, he was placed in the surgical department of the penitentiary hospital. On 1 February 2008 he was examined by an oncologist, who diagnosed him with a giant cavernous haemangioma of the head and stated that surgical treatment was not recommended because of the extent of the propagation of the tumour. He recommended symptomatic treatment only.
59. On 13 March 2008 the applicant was again examined by the medical-social commission, which granted him category-2 disability status.
C. Complaints and applications for medical treatment
lodged by the applicant and his wife on his behalf
60. In 2003 the applicant applied to a court seeking to have the failure to provide him with adequate medical aid in prison declared unlawful. He also asked the court to order his placement in the Chelyabinsk Oncological Centre for treatment.
61. On 16 September 2003 the Tsentralniy District Court of Chelyabinsk dismissed the claim. The court found that the following medical aid was provided to the applicant during his imprisonment: between 28 February and 10 May 2000 - examination by doctors and conservative treatment; between 24 May and 20 August 2000 - placement in the surgery department of YaV-48/3 (ЯВ 48/3) hospital for convicts, Chelyabinsk, consultations with a neurosurgeon and oncologist; 19 November 2000 - placement in the YaV-48/3 hospital for another elective operation conducted on 14 December 2000; between 11 June and 4 December 2001 - placement in YaV-48/3 hospital, computer tomography conducted on 8 October 2001; between 15 April and 8 May 2002 - treatment and consultations by doctors in institution US-20/12, St Petersburg (учреждение УС-20/12 ГУИН по Ст. -Петербургу и Ленинградской области); between 30 July and 10 October 2002 - placement in the surgery department of YaV-48/3 hospital; 22 August 2002 - consultation by the Department Head of the Plastes (Пластэс) centre; 20 September 2002 - an examination by a special medical commission (СМК); 1 October 2002 - a medico-social examination (МСЭ) in Magnitogorsk; 26 January 2003 - placement in the YaV-48/3 hospital; 3 February 2003 - consultation by the head of Chelyabinsk hospital No. 3 (ЧЛХО МУ 3 "ГКБ N 3 г. Челябинска). The court held that the medical aid provided had been sufficient. The applicant appealed.
62. On 20 November 2003 the Chelyabinsk Regional Court
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 11 12 13
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
