pharmacy
October 18, 2024
The case involved involves a dispute in which the ASL had attempted to oppose an injunction regarding reimbursements for drugs supplied but its interpretation of the charging rules was in conflict with the legislation
by Attorney Rodolfo Pacifico
Article 1193 of the civil code regarding the attribution of payments does not apply to mandatory debt-credit relationships between the National Health Service and pharmacies. It was already a consolidated position of the Supreme Court that the regulation regarding the attribution of payment (referred to in art. 1193 of the Civil Code) is applicable only to a plurality of obligatory relationships between the same parties and not when the plurality of debts pertains to a single relationship obligatory.
Uniqueness of the relationship between pharmacies and the NHS:
The services provided continuously by a pharmacy in favor of the National Health Service do not integrate autonomous and distinct mandatory relationships, but pertain to a single relationship, governed by the pharmaceutical agreement and by the concession issued by the ASL itself in execution of the collective agreement transfused in Presidential Decree no. 371/1998. In particular, following the release of this agreement, a long-term, unitary and continuous relationship is established, concerning the supply of medicines on behalf of the NHS, which is consequently required to reimburse the pharmacies for the advance amounts upon presentation of periodic accounting slips representing the recipes sent the previous month.
It follows that the individual payments made by the ASL to the pharmacies integrate partial obligations of that single relationship and therefore, based on the legal criterion dictated by the civil code (art. 1194, paragraph 2, civil code), they cannot be attributed by the debtor-ASL in capital account without the consent of the creditor-pharmacy.
Despite having obtained acceptance at first instance of the opposition proposed against an injunction for over 40 thousand euros in relation to the supply of medicines which took place in some months of 2011, it remained unsuccessful in subsequent stages of judgment despite documenting some payments by attributing them to conflict with the relevant regulations.
For further information Court of Cassation 16 July 2024 on www.dirittosanitario.net at the following link:
TAG: REFUND PROCEDURES, DELAYS IN PAYMENTS
If you liked the article, stay in touch with us on our social channels by following us on:
Or stay up to date in the pharmaceutical sector by subscribing to our newsletter!
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
Health Law
The competence of the Municipality in pharmaceutical planning after the 2012 reform: the role of the Municipal Council in the management of dispensaries
The care of
Health Law
The 2021 judicial case of false prescriptions for opioid-based drugs has ended, with a ruling from the Supreme Court that draws attention to the control of electronic prescriptions…
The care of
Health Law
The TAR rejected the appeal against the ASL which canceled prescriptions sent and delivered for the purposes of payment with consequent charging to the structure of the full price of the medicines dispensed,…
The care of
Health Law
The lawyer Paolo Leopardi comments on what was established by the ruling of the Council of State (n. 6192 of 10 July 2024) which intervenes on the subject of revision of the organic plan, specifically…
The care of
