El presente trabajo tiene como objetivo analizar la doctrina del Tribunal Supremo en relación con el concepto de tercero responsable al que se le puede pedir el reintegro de los gastos causados por un paciente que ingresa en un hospital privado y es derivado por éste, en supuesto que normalmente es de urgencia vital, a un hospital privado. Lo característico de la STS es la diferenciación que establece entre las obligaciones de la aseguradora a la que corresponde prestar cuantos servicios vienen en su póliza y el hospital que es un centro de atención de ésta en virtud de una relación mercantil que no trasciende a considerar que el hospital privado tenga las mismas obligaciones que la póliza. Sobre esta base se niega que los hospitales privados tengan la condición de terceros responsables a los efectos del reintegro de gastos.
The objective of this paper is to analyze the doctrine of the Supreme Court in relation to the concept of a responsible third party who can be asked to reimburse the expenses caused by a patient who is admitted to a private hospital and is referred by it, Of course, it is normally a vital emergency, to a private hospital. What is characteristic of the STS is the differentiation it establishes between the obligations of the insurer to which it corresponds to provide as many services as are included in its policy and the hospital that is a care center of the latter by virtue of a commercial relationship that does not go beyond considering that the private hospital has the same obligations as the policy. On this basis, it is denied that private hospitals have the status of responsible third parties for the purposes of reimbursement of expenses.