Background: We have analyzed the aged population disability processes to establish specifics and regularities of the causal structure of disability among the working and nonworking aged population. Methods: In total, 1208 examination reports of the Medical & Social Expert Commission have been subjected to excerption in Almaty. Results: Persons having the second disability status prevail in the working aged contingent 4,4%, which is much higher than the ratios for the first and second disability statuses (0,4% and 0,6%, respectively). Among the nonworking population, persons having the second disability status largely prevail too 8,1% (3,1% and 1,1%, respectively). The casual structure of disability among the nonworking disabled persons includes as follows: blood circulatory system diseases (40%), malignant neoplasms (27,2%), and diseases of the eye and its appendages (10,2%). They are followed by endocrine diseases, nutritional and metabolic disturbances (7,6%), bodily injuries (3%), and urogenital system diseases with musculoskeletal system ones 2,3% each. The data collection for the working aged population contingent has found out blood circulatory system diseases (47%) and malignant neoplasms (34,4%). Alongside with that, the distinctive feature among the said aged population cohort is a substantial predominance of bodily injuries (7,4%), endocrine diseases, nutritional and metabolic disturbances (2,3%), and only 1,4% is accounted for diseases of the eye and its appendages., Akmaral K. Abikulova, Kazbek A. Tulebaev, Aikan A. Akanov, Botagoz S. Turdalieva, Sundetgali B. Kalmahanov, Mussaeva A. Bakhit, Aldamzharova K. Madina, and Literatura
V roce 2013 vysoké české soudy již vydaly druhé zásadní rozhodnutí ve věci regulačních poplatků podle § 16a zákona č. 48/1997 Sb., o veřejném zdravotním pojištění a o změně a doplnění některých souvisejících zákonů, ve znění pozdějších předpisů. První rozhodnutí vydal jako své usnesení vedené pod sp. zn. Konf 38/2012 zvláštní senát zřízený podle zákona č. 131/2002 Sb., o rozhodování některých kompetenčních sporů. Účelem tohoto rozhodnutí pak bylo rozhodnout o právní povaze regulačních poplatků. Druhé rozhodnutí pak vydal Ústavní soud ČR., In the spring 2013 the special tribunal consisting of judges of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court resolved a conflict of competencies between civil court and health insurance company. The dispute was who should decide on the obligation to pay regulatory fees under the Public Health Insurance Act. The special tribunal concluded that the competent authority is a civil court. The reason for this decision is that regulatory fees are subject to private law. However, arguments to support the decision are not too relevant. Most of the arguments on the other hand show the public law nature of regulatory fees., Radek Policar, and Literatura