Background: Informed consent is a fundamental legal requirement before conducting a medical intervention. Consent forms consistent with legal elements are necessary to ensure that patients make informed decisions. Preprinted forms are widely used in health institutions in Addis Ababa for obtaining informed consent; however, the legal compliance of these forms has not been thoroughly examined. Objective: This article aimed to assess the legal compliance of preprinted informed consent forms utilized by health institutions in Addis Ababa. The study focused on analyzing the contents to determine whether they included the essential legal elements or provided adequate space for them, identifying gaps and offering recommendations to improve adherence to national laws and standards. Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 21 randomly selected informed consent forms from public and private health institutions in Addis Ababa. An assessment checklist developed from 20 elements identified from primary and secondary legal sources was used for the assessment. Data were analyzed and summarized using Microsoft Excel's PivotTable feature. Results: The indication for and recommended intervention were preprinted on 28.6% of intervention-specific forms, with 71.4% providing two blank lines for handwritten entries. None of the forms included space for anticipated benefits or expectations. Material risks were preprinted on 28.6% of specific forms, while the rest provided two blank lines. Over two-thirds of the forms lacked blank space for alternative interventions or the consequences of no intervention. Additionally, 47.6% of forms omitted space for the health professional's name and signature, and 52.4% lacked space for the guardian's or legally authorized representative's name and signature. Conclusion and recommendation: Significant gaps were identified in the legal compliance of informed consent forms. Given that preprinted consent forms play a pivotal role in saving time, serving both as informational documents for patients and legal records in potential legal disputes, it is imperative to develop and implement consent forms that adhere to legal standards.

“What's good for the goose is good for the gander.” Apparently not. In the wake of the recent judgment of the Honble Supreme Court holding advocates not liable under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), the apex court has inadvertently made a distinction between the legal profession and the medical profession. The Honble Supreme Court, via its recent judgment in the case of Bar of Indian Lawyers through its President, Jasbir Singh Malik vs D K Gandhi, PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr., has held that advocates would not be covered under the ambit of the CPA 1986, reenacted in 2019. An attempt has been made here to threadbare the judgment passed in the said case to understand how the medical profession is not any different from the legal profession to be held liable under the CPA. Or is it?