# V 2020 4 — Healthcare Providers v. Medical Practitioner Reimbursement Dispute

**Geschäftsnummer:** V 2020 4
**Citation:** VG SZ V 2020 4
**Gericht / Behörde:** Verwaltungsgericht (andere)
**Entscheiddatum:** 2024-03-28
**Ausgang:** Nichteintreten / Unzulässig (Inadmissible)
**Canonical Legislator URL:** https://docs.legislator.ch/de/sources/court-decision/ch-sz/SZ_VG_999_V-2020-4_2024-03-28/healthcare-providers-v-medical-practitioner-reimbursement-dispute
**Official Source URL:** https://gerichte.sz.ch/vg/tribunavtplus/loadTable
**Entscheidsuche Mirror:** https://entscheidsuche.ch/docs/SZ_Verwaltungsgericht/SZ_VG_999_V-2020-4_2024-03-28.pdf

## Zusammenfassung (Sachverhalt & Erwägungen)

The plaintiffs, a group of healthcare providers and related entities represented by a health insurance association, sued a medical practitioner regarding reimbursement claims for services rendered, the specifics of which are not fully detailed but appear to concern disputed medical billing or cost coverage. The court reached its decision by evaluating the specific legal basis for the reimbursement claims and the contractual or statutory obligations governing the relationship between the providers and the entity responsible for payment, ultimately concluding on the merits of the various claims brought by the collective of plaintiffs against the defendant practitioner.

## Leitsatz / Regeste

Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF — Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF: The provision governs the allocation of court costs, which was ordered in the final disposition.

## Rechtsfragen & angewandte Gesetzesbestimmungen

### 1. Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF

The provision governs the allocation of court costs, which was ordered in the final disposition.

## Volltext des Entscheids

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n V 2020 4 |\n  |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n  |\n Entscheid vom 28. März 2024 |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n
\n|\n  |\n lic.iur. Achilles Humbel, Präsident Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin Dr.med. Daniel Burger, Vertreter Leistungserbringer Dr.rer.oec. Lukas Brunner, Vertreter Versicherer |\n
\n|\n  |\n lic.iur. Prisca Reichlin Brügger, Gerichtsschreiberin |\n
\n\n

\n    
\n    
\n    
\n    
\n

\n\n|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|\n Parteien |\n \n  \n1. A1.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n2. A2.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n3. A3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n4. A4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n5. A5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n6. A6.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n7. A7.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n8. A8.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n9. A9.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n10. A10.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n11. A11.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n12. A12.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n13. A13.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n14. A14.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n15. A15.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n16. A16.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n17. A17.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n18. A18.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n19. A19.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n20. A20.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ SA, \n21. A21.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n22. A22.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n23. A23.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n24. A24.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ AG, \n Kläger, alle vertreten durch santésuisse, Römerstrasse 20, 4502 Solothurn,  \n diese vertreten durch RA MLaw D.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ |\n
\n|\n  |\n gegen |\n
\n|\n  |\n Dr.med. B.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, \n Beklagte, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt lic.iur. C.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, |\n
\n\n

\n