Is there any relevant law regarding hospitals refusing to admit patients?

In reality, due to lack of legal knowledge or differences in legal understanding, in similar cases, litigants almost always choose tort liability and include contracting fees, mental damage solatium, etc. Contents of the petition. In this case, the judge is first required to clarify the legal relationship, that is, the plaintiff has two rights of claim, but can only choose one to exercise, and if he chooses one, he will lose the others. Only in this way can the litigation rights of the parties be protected while complying with the law. When the court hears such cases, the judge should exercise the power of interpretation, inform the parties of their rights, and require the parties to choose one of the requests. At the same time, the judge must also inform the parties of the litigation risks. Because when a party requests compensation for mental damage, it is uncertain whether and how much mental damage solatium the party can obtain. There may also be situations where the amount of mental damage solatium is less than the contracting costs. At this time, the parties may easily have an unbalanced mentality and may easily lead to litigation and other phenomena. However, before the case is heard, the judge cannot and cannot tell the parties which request will receive the greatest support. Therefore, the judge's exercise of the power of explanation must grasp certain standards, and both parties must understand their litigation rights and voluntarily bear the legal consequences of their choices.

In trial practice, there are also situations where the parties mistakenly believe that only tort liability or liability for contractual negligence arises, and ignore the competing issues of liability for contractual negligence and tort liability. In order to prevent the party from filing a claim for moral damages on the grounds of tort and being supported by the court, and later claiming compensation for the loss of reliance interests from the other party on the grounds of contracting negligence, the judge also needs to exercise the power of interpretation to make it clear that the same case will be litigated again. Inform the parties that they may no longer sue for infringement or contractual negligence in relation to the case. If the party files another lawsuit regarding the case in the future, the court should not accept it. However, if the party previously brought a lawsuit to the court on the grounds of infringement, and after a trial, the court finds that the defendant does not bear tort liability, and the plaintiff's claim is not supported by the court, the plaintiff can still sue separately on the grounds of negligence in contracting.