Criminal liability of doctors is one of the most serious areas of risk in medical practice. It most commonly arises where a patient has suffered serious harm, has died, or a doctor is alleged to have exposed a patient to an immediate danger of loss of life or serious bodily injury.
For a doctor, the important question is not only whether an error occurred, but above all: when a doctor incurs criminal liability and what must be proved before the case can actually reach court.
Not every medical error gives rise to criminal liability. Nor does every unsuccessful treatment amount to a criminal offence.
When does a doctor incur criminal liability?
A doctor may incur criminal liability only where their conduct satisfies the elements of an offence defined in the Polish Criminal Code. An adverse clinical outcome alone is therefore insufficient.
The first questions to establish are:
- whether a duty of care was breached,
- whether the doctor culpably acted or failed to act,
- whether there is a link between the doctor’s conduct and the outcome or state of danger,
- whether the doctor’s conduct satisfies the elements of an offence defined in the Polish Criminal Code
Doctors must practise in accordance with current medical knowledge, using the available methods and resources, in line with ethical principles and with due care. This follows from Article 4 of the Polish Act on the Professions of Doctor and Dentist and is also relevant when assessing criminal liability.
Criminal liability and medical error
Medical error and a doctor’s criminal liability are not the same thing.
An error may be relevant in civil or professional disciplinary proceedings without amounting to a criminal offence. Criminal liability requires more: a specific act must be attributable to a particular person, and the statutory requirements of the Polish Criminal Code must be proved.
In practice, criminal cases most often concern allegations of serious error: the patient’s death, serious bodily injury, or exposure of the patient to an immediate danger.
This is why expert evidence carries such weight in criminal proceedings. The court and public prosecutor do not determine the medical standard unaided; they require an answer as to whether the doctor’s conduct departed from current medical knowledge and whether that departure was material to the outcome.
Article 160 of the Polish Criminal Code
One of the key provisions is Article 160 of the Polish Criminal Code, which concerns exposing a person to an immediate danger of loss of life or serious bodily injury.
Of particular importance to doctors is a situation in which they owe a duty to care for the patient. The assessment then concerns not only whether the doctor caused harm, but also whether an act or omission created or increased a specific danger to the patient.
This matters because liability under Article 160 of the Polish Criminal Code may arise even where neither death nor serious bodily injury ultimately occurs. It may be sufficient that the patient was specifically exposed to an immediate danger.
In its judgment of 4 March 2020, IV KK 221/19, the Polish Supreme Court considered the case of an on-call doctor who was alleged, among other things, to have failed to keep a patient under observation and to order a CT scan of the head following a head injury. The Court stated that Article 160 of the Polish Criminal Code is concerned with the consequence consisting in a specific exposure of the protected legal interest to danger, rather than only a subsequent violation of the patient’s life or health.
Diagnostic error and a doctor’s criminal liability
Diagnostic error is among the types of error most frequently examined in criminal cases against doctors.
It may involve:
- failing to recognise symptoms,
- drawing incorrect conclusions from symptoms,
- failing to order necessary tests,
- conducting an inadequate diagnostic assessment.
In judgment IV KK 221/19, the Polish Supreme Court described diagnostic error as including drawing conclusions from symptoms that differ from those dictated by medical knowledge, failing to recognise symptoms, or conducting diagnostic tests incorrectly or omitting them altogether.
For a doctor, this has one clear implication: in criminal proceedings, it is crucial to show why a particular diagnostic decision was made. The medical decision itself may have been correct, but if the records do not allow the doctor’s reasoning to be reconstructed, the defence becomes considerably more difficult.
Unintentional causing of a patient’s death
Where improper conduct results in a patient’s death, the doctor’s conduct may be classified as the offence defined in Article 155 of the Polish Criminal Code, namely unintentional causing of death.
This does not mean, however, that every death following treatment automatically results in the doctor’s criminal liability.
It is necessary to prove:
- a breach of the applicable standards of care,
- that the outcome was foreseeable,
- a causal link between the doctor’s conduct and the patient’s death,
- that fault can be attributed to a specific person.
In practice, causation is often the most difficult element. Criminal proceedings must determine whether proper conduct by the doctor could realistically have prevented the outcome or materially reduced the risk of its occurrence.
Serious and less serious bodily injury to a patient
A doctor’s criminal liability may also be considered under Articles 156 and 157 of the Polish Criminal Code.
Article 156 concerns serious bodily injury, meaning the gravest consequences for a patient. Article 157 concerns an impairment of the function of a bodily organ or a health disorder of lesser severity.
For a doctor, it is important that the occurrence of harm alone does not establish a criminal offence. The material question remains whether the harm resulted from a culpable breach of the applicable rules of conduct, or fell within the bounds of a complication, therapeutic risk or the unavoidable course of the illness.
A doctor’s criminal liability for an omission
In medical cases, criminal liability very often concerns an omission rather than a positive act.
This includes, for example, situations in which a doctor:
- did not order a test,
- did not keep the patient under observation,
- did not refer the patient to hospital,
- did not respond to a deterioration in the patient’s condition,
- did not provide treatment despite being under a duty to do so.
In Polish criminal law, a doctor’s status as a guarantor is significant: it denotes a person under a special legal duty to prevent the prohibited outcome. In the doctor–patient relationship, that duty may arise from undertaking treatment, being on duty, accepting the patient, or another situation in which the doctor actually assumes responsibility for the patient’s care.
This is precisely why criminal cases examine so closely who was responsible for the patient at the relevant time and the scope of the individual doctor’s duties.
When does a doctor’s case reach the public prosecutor?
A criminal case very often begins with a report made by the patient or the patient’s family.
This most commonly happens after:
- a patient’s death,
- a serious deterioration in health,
- a suspected delay in diagnosis,
- a refusal to admit the patient to hospital,
- the discharge of a patient whose condition subsequently deteriorated,
- a conflict with the patient’s family.
As a practical matter, doctors should remember that a report to the public prosecutor does not in itself mean that they have committed an offence. It does mean, however, that their decisions, records and communication with the patient or family will be assessed from the perspective of criminal proceedings.
The role of medical records in criminal proceedings
Medical records are of great importance in criminal proceedings.
They show:
- which symptoms the patient reported,
- which tests were carried out,
- which decisions were made,
- which instructions were given,
- whether the patient was informed of the risks,
- why the doctor selected a particular course of action.
In my experience, the greatest difficulties arise when a doctor remembers discussing matters with the patient or considering particular risks, but there is no trace of this in the records.
In criminal proceedings, matters that cannot be demonstrated through the documents very often become disputed.
Criminal, professional and civil liability of doctors
A single medical incident may trigger several proceedings in parallel.
A doctor may simultaneously face:
- criminal proceedings,
- civil proceedings for damages or compensation for non-pecuniary harm,
- proceedings before the professional liability officer,
- proceedings before the Polish Patient Rights Ombudsman.
Each of these proceedings has a different purpose and is governed by different rules.
Criminal proceedings determine whether an offence has been committed. Civil proceedings concern redress for harm. Professional liability concerns breaches of the rules governing medical practice and professional ethics. This distinction matters because the discontinuance of one case does not always bring the others to an automatic end.
A doctor’s criminal liability from the perspective of a healthcare provider
Where a doctor operates a healthcare provider or manages a facility, criminal liability should be considered more broadly than by reference to a single incident alone.
Particular attention should be paid to:
- the organisation of duty rotas,
- the flow of information,
- triage and patient assessment procedures,
- rules for handing patients over between members of staff,
- the availability of diagnostic services,
- the recording of medical decisions.
In criminal cases, the question is often not merely, ‘Did the doctor make an error?’, but also, ‘Did the facility’s system of work make it possible to prevent that error or respond to it appropriately?’
The owner of a healthcare provider should consider criminal liability not only after receiving a summons from the public prosecutor, but already when organising work and establishing procedures.
How can the risk of a doctor’s criminal liability be reduced?
The risk of a dispute with a patient cannot be eliminated entirely. It is nevertheless possible to reduce significantly the risk that a case develops into a serious criminal matter.
The most important measures are:
- recording medical decisions,
- clearly documenting the basis for diagnostic decisions,
- recording instructions and a patient’s refusals,
- maintaining consistent procedures within the facility,
- ensuring an effective flow of information between team members,
- analysing adverse incidents and implementing improvements.
To some extent, these measures protect doctors and facilities if, months or years later, someone examines why a particular decision was made.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Does every medical error give rise to a doctor’s criminal liability?
No. A doctor’s criminal liability requires the statutory requirements of the Polish Criminal Code to be met. A medical error may be relevant in civil or professional disciplinary proceedings, but does not invariably amount to a criminal offence.
When does a doctor incur criminal liability?
A doctor incurs criminal liability where their culpable act or omission satisfies the elements of an offence, such as exposing a patient to an immediate danger, unintentionally causing death or causing bodily harm.
Can a doctor incur criminal liability if the patient ultimately suffered no harm?
Yes. Under Article 160 of the Polish Criminal Code, a specific exposure of the patient to an immediate danger of loss of life or serious bodily injury may itself be material, even if the gravest outcome does not ultimately occur.
Does a criminal case against a doctor always end in an indictment?
No. Proceedings may end with a refusal to open an investigation, discontinuance, or the filing of an indictment. The medical records, expert evidence and the ability to attribute specific conduct to a particular doctor are crucial.
Can good medical records help a doctor in criminal proceedings?
Yes. Good records are often fundamental because they allow the doctor’s reasoning, the patient’s symptoms, diagnostic and treatment decisions, and the instructions given to be reconstructed.
If you operate a healthcare provider or practice and would like to check whether your procedures, records and organisation of work reduce the risk of criminal liability, it is worth carrying out that analysis early, before a summons from the public prosecutor arrives. Please contact me to discuss the matter.
Legal basis and sources
- Polish Criminal Code — consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2025, item 383, as subsequently amended.
- Polish Act on the Professions of Doctor and Dentist — consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2026, item 37.
- Polish Code of Criminal Procedure — consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2026, item 490.
- Judgment of the Polish Supreme Court of 4 March 2020, IV KK 221/19.
