On 26 February 2013 the new "Law on Patients' Rights" (hereinafter also the "Law") became effective. This Law strengthens patients' rights vis-à-vis the insurdnce company and also regulates patients' rights regarding their relation to the doctor. This has consequences for the laws on medical liability all doctors must consider. The doctor's performance is and remains a service and such service does not hold any guarantee of success. Nevertheless, this Law primarily reads as a "law on the duties of physicians". To duly take into account these duties and to avoid mistakes and misinterpretation of the Law, the Ethics Committee of the Consortium of Osteosynthesis Trauma Germany (AOTRAUMA-D) has drafted comments on the Law. Brief summaries of its effects are to be found at the end of the respective comment under the heading "Consequences for Practice". The text of the law was influenced particularly by case law, as continuously developed by the German Federal Court of Justice ("BGH"). The implementation of the Law on Patients' Rights was effected by the newly inserted sections 630a to 630h of the German Civil Code (the "BGB"), which are analysed below. The following comments are addressed to physicians only and do not deal with the specific requirements and particularities of the other medical professions such as physiotherapy, midwifery and others so on. Special attention should be paid to the comments on the newly inserted Duty to inform, which has to be fullfilled prior to any diagnostic or therapeutic procedure (sec. 630c para 2 sentence 1 BGB). Under certain conditions the doctor also has to inform the patient about the circumstances that lead to the presumed occurance of a therapeutic or diagnostic malpractice (sec. 630c para. 2 sentence 2 BGB), based on the manifestation of an undesired event or an undesired outcome. As before, the patient's valid consent to any procedure (sec. 630d BGB) is directly linked to the comprehensive and timely provision of information (sec. 630e BGB). Comprehensive documentation obligations regarding all procedures are stipulated in sec. 630f BGB. As before, the burden of proof still rests with the patient, unless a severe malpractice has been established (sec. 630h BGB). The definition of "severe malpractice" remains unchanged and is based on the case law of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH). The patient's obligations to preserve his or her health and to actively support the process of recovery and securing a positive outcome of the treatment are not explicitly mentioned in the Law. Nevertheless, the patient and the physician need to work closely together to achieve a successful result of the treatment. In case the patient does not give his or her cooperation, the physician should consider terminating the treatment relationship.