Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
In the Odrex doctors’ medical negligence case, two of the five hearings scheduled for early October took place. One of them was possible only after the court appointed defense counsel for each defendant due to the absence of the lawyers for both defendants.
It is reported that one of the defendants, surgeon Vitalii Rusakov, posted a October schedule on his Facebook page, calling the urgency of the case excessive. The court sessions were planned for 1, 2, 7, 8 and 13 October, but this announced schedule remained on paper. Of five hearings, only two took place — 1 and 8 October. The rest did not occur or were canceled in advance. In particular, the 13 October session was canceled due to defense motions. Thus, even a tight schedule, which one of the defendants complained about, did not ensure a regular review of the Odrex doctors’ medical negligence case. The trial, which should establish the circumstances of a private clinic patient’s death, continues to lose time due to adjournments. Dear lawyers who do not attend court sessions. Notably revealing was the situation on 1 October. On that day, the Kyiv District Court of Odesa considered extending the preventive measures for Vitalii Rusakov and the other defendant — oncologist Marina Belozertovskaia. However, lawyers for both doctors did not appear at the hearing. To avoid delay, the court had to appoint separate defense counsel for each defendant. As a result, the court left both doctors with personal obligations, and Rusakov’s suspension from his post was extended. After the hearing, the surgeon said that he had already resigned as head of the Odrex surgical department of his own accord. The next hearing, scheduled for 2 October, did not take place. Read also: Death of Adnan Kivan: the court resumed examining evidence in the Odrex doctors’ case 7 October, the court again failed to continue the proceedings. Belozertovskaia’s defense counsel filed a motion to adjourn, explaining it by her participation in another court case. At the same time, one of Rusakov’s lawyers did not appear at the court. Only 8 October, the court was able to resume the case. Yet the subsequent hearings scheduled for 9 and 13 October were canceled again due to Belozertovskaia’s lawyer’s motions. Against this backdrop, the earlier statements by Rusakov himself deserve particular attention. In describing his defense, the surgeon emphasized that his lawyers are “very expensive.” However, the high cost of legal services apparently does not guarantee their presence in court. At the same time, explanations of being busy with other cases are increasingly becoming grounds for adjournments. Under these circumstances, the natural question arises: why can the lawyers’ schedules not be coordinated with the dates of the criminal case proceedings involving possible medical liability for a person’s death? The court has already noted regular absences by defense lawyers. October adjournments continued the pattern that had formed in September. Then the Kyiv District Court of Odesa scheduled 13 hearings in the Odrex doctors’ case. However, only six proceeded in full. Another seven were postponed or did not allow the case to proceed on the merits. After Rusakov’s lawyers twice filed motions to adjourn due to their participation in other court cases, the presiding judge Viktor Chaplitskyi deemed their reasons for non-attendance unfounded and forwarded the information to the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of the Bar. There they will assess whether the lawyers’ actions contain signs of a disciplinary offense. At the same time, the mere fact of regular adjournments does not prove the lawyers’ intent to deliberately delay proceedings. Whether a disciplinary offense occurred will be determined by the authorized bodies. The case progresses slowly, while time is running out. In practice, the process has been moving for several months from one adjournment to another. The court schedules hearings, lawyers file motions, and the hearing of important evidence for the case is postponed again. This situation also carries legal risks. Prolonged proceedings may lead to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. Under certain legally prescribed conditions, this creates a risk that the case may be concluded without a guilty verdict.
What is known about the Odrex doctors’ medical negligence case: The Kyiv District Court of Odesa is examining a criminal case against the Odrex private clinic doctors Vitalii Rusakov and Marina Belozertovskaia. They are charged under part 1 of article 140 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — improper performance of professional duties by a medical worker. The case concerns the circumstances of treatment and the death of Odesa businessman and founder of KADORR Group Adnan Kivan, who died in October 2024 of the year. According to the investigation, the doctors’ actions or inaction could have led to postoperative complications and the development of sepsis, which against the backdrop of cancer could have caused the patient’s death. The accused do not admit guilt. The final assessment of the evidence and the question of their guilt must be provided by the court.
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Адвокати не приходять, засідання скасовують: справа про лікарів Odrex знову буксує". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: RBC-Ukraine.
