Justice by Templates

Legislative Stalemate, Standardized Judicial Policymaking, and Stimulus to Health Litigation in Chile

Bibliographic Data

ID24225291
AuthorsCristián Villalonga Torrijo (0000-0001-5018-861X, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile)
Year2026
Pages1-21
Publication date2026-07-31
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLatin American Research Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0023-8791 • E-ISSN: 1542-4278
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/lar.2026.10148
OpenAlexW7172029603
LanguageEN
References cited24

For about twenty years, Chilean high courts have issued myriad standardized rulings against the annual price-fixing adjustments in private health insurance contracts, intervening in health policy and propelling the emergence of a buoyant litigation industry by awarding attorneys’ fees to claimants. In deciding thousands of cases almost identically in protecting fundamental rights, particularly those involving private property, courts overrode legal rules on price adjustability that several congressional bills intended to reform, albeit unsuccessfully. And in granting claimants’ fees, courts simultaneously reinforced private insurance clients’ ability to litigate. Thus, courts reviewed a critical aspect of a health-care delivery system that political actors across the entire electoral spectrum have called into question. Employing a sequential comparison between the politics of private health insurance premium regulation and the origins of mass standardized judicial decisions, this article explores how Chilean high courts addressed legislative stalemate through an unusual form of judicial policymaking.

attorney fees · Fundamental rights · Health care delivery · judicial policymaking · judicialization of health · legislative stalemate · private health insurance · Private property · Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Health Policy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access