The Court:

In view of article 1147 Code civil:

Given that while a dental surgeon’s obligation is de moyens as regards the treatment he provides, it is de résultat as regards any prosthetic device he provides, for he must produce one which is not defective;

Given that M. Bordas, a dental surgeon, equipped M. Nadjar with a dental plate which the latter found defective, and that when he claimed his money back as well as damages, the tribunal dismissed the claim on the ground that M. Bordas was subject only to an obligation de moyens;

But given that in so deciding the judgment under attack violated the text cited above;

For these reasons QUASHES the judgment of the tribunal d’instance of Marseilles of 25 October 1985, and remits the matter to the tribunal d’instance of Aix-en-Provence.

Subsequent Developments

This note on subsequent developments reflects the legal situation as of October 2004.

Civ 1, 15 November 1988, Bull I, no 319: "Although a dental surgeon is bound by a simple duty of care (obligation de moyens) in relation to the professional care which he provides, he is bound by a strict duty (obligation de résultat) as provider of a prosthesis". Case law maintained.

Cf Juriclasseur "civil", instalment 441 1: "Santé Responsibilité des chirurgiens dentistes, sage-femmes...(Health responsibility of dental surgeons, midwives..." Michèle Harichaux, 1998: "In the exercise of his liberal profession, a dental surgeon is, like a doctor, bound to his patient by a contract of care resting on the same deontological and juridicial principles as the medical contract. He is therefore subject, like a doctor, to the regime of the contractual duty of care in respect of dental care. But when a prosthesis is installed, his liability has increased, since, besides his duty of care related to professional care, he takes on a strict duty as the supplier of the prosthesis. According to the case law, which is now constant, the dental surgeon has therefore a possible double responsibility at the time of the installation of the prosthesis. He is subject to a duty of care in relation to the professional care necessary for the prosthesis, and he is bound by a strict duty as supplier of a prosthesis, having to deliver an appliance without defect" (Civ 1, 17 October 1995, Bull no 369, approving the judgment under attack for "having properly reiterated that dental surgeons are bound by a duty of care for the professional care which they provide, and a strict duty so far as prostheses are concerned").

Translation by Mr Raymond Youngs

Back to top

This page last updated Thursday, 15-Dec-2005 09:05:51 CST. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.