Medical Malpractice: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "== [196] Counsel relies on the decision in Cooper v. Valakis, [2012] O.J. No. 361, a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. He submits that, at paragraph 91, the Court set out the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. A physician must exercise the degree of skill expected of a normal prudent practitioner of the same experience and skill. If he is a specialist, a higher degree of skill is required. <ref name=" == [10] There is no disput...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== | {{Citation: | ||
| categories = | |||
| shortlink = | |||
}} | |||
==Dickie v. Minett, 2012 ONSC 4474 (CanLII)<ref name="Dickie"/>== | |||
[196] Counsel relies on the decision in Cooper v. Valakis, [2012] O.J. No. 361, a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. He submits that, at paragraph 91, the Court set out the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. <b><u>A physician must exercise the degree of skill expected of a normal prudent practitioner of the same experience and skill. If he is a specialist, a higher degree of skill is required.</b></u> | |||
= | <ref name="Dickie"><i>Dickie v. Minett,</i> 2012 ONSC 4474 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/fsrfd>, retrieved on 2024-08-28</ref> | ||
[10] There is no dispute that the defendants owed Ms. Sanzone a duty of care when providing treatment. The law in Ontario has held, however, that when professional malpractice is alleged, expert opinion evidence is required to allow a trier of fact to properly assess whether a defendant’s action fell below the appropriate standard of care. The expert called to establish negligence must be a professional practising in the same field as the defendant: <i>Kurdina v. Gratzer,</i> 2010 ONCA 288, [2010], O.J. No. 1551, at para. 2. Furthermore, the expert’s opinion must establish all elements of cause in a negligence action: <i>McNeil v. Easterbrook,</i> [2004] O.J. No. 3976 (S.C.), at para. 16. | ==<i>Sanzone v Schecter et al,</i> 2015 ONSC 4829 (CanLII)<ref name="Sanzone"/>== | ||
[10] There is no dispute that the defendants owed Ms. Sanzone a duty of care when providing treatment. <b><u>The law in Ontario has held, however, that when professional malpractice is alleged, expert opinion evidence is required to allow a trier of fact to properly assess whether a defendant’s action fell below the appropriate standard of care.</b></u> The expert called to establish negligence must be a professional practising in the same field as the defendant: <i>Kurdina v. Gratzer,</i> 2010 ONCA 288, [2010], O.J. No. 1551, at para. 2.<ref name="Kurdina"/> Furthermore, the expert’s opinion must establish all elements of cause in a negligence action: <i>McNeil v. Easterbrook,</i> [2004] O.J. No. 3976 (S.C.), at para. 16. | |||
<ref name="Sanzone"><i>Sanzone v Schecter et al,</i< 2015 ONSC 4829 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/gkh81>, retrieved on 2024-08-28</ref> | |||
<ref name="Kurdina"><i>Kurdina v. Dief,</i> 2010 ONCA 288 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/29bdj>, retrieved on 2024-08-28</ref> | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 18:48, 28 August 2024
| Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 © | |
|---|---|
| Date Retrieved: | 2024-09-21 |
| CLNP Page ID: | 2403 |
| Page Categories: | |
| Citation: | Medical Malpractice, CLNP 2403, <>, retrieved on 2024-09-21 |
| Editor: | MKent |
| Last Updated: | 2024/08/28 |
Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076
Dickie v. Minett, 2012 ONSC 4474 (CanLII)[1]
[196] Counsel relies on the decision in Cooper v. Valakis, [2012] O.J. No. 361, a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. He submits that, at paragraph 91, the Court set out the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. A physician must exercise the degree of skill expected of a normal prudent practitioner of the same experience and skill. If he is a specialist, a higher degree of skill is required.
Sanzone v Schecter et al, 2015 ONSC 4829 (CanLII)[2]
[10] There is no dispute that the defendants owed Ms. Sanzone a duty of care when providing treatment. The law in Ontario has held, however, that when professional malpractice is alleged, expert opinion evidence is required to allow a trier of fact to properly assess whether a defendant’s action fell below the appropriate standard of care. The expert called to establish negligence must be a professional practising in the same field as the defendant: Kurdina v. Gratzer, 2010 ONCA 288, [2010], O.J. No. 1551, at para. 2.[3] Furthermore, the expert’s opinion must establish all elements of cause in a negligence action: McNeil v. Easterbrook, [2004] O.J. No. 3976 (S.C.), at para. 16.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Dickie v. Minett, 2012 ONSC 4474 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/fsrfd>, retrieved on 2024-08-28
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Sanzone v Schecter et al,</i< 2015 ONSC 4829 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/gkh81>, retrieved on 2024-08-28
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Kurdina v. Dief, 2010 ONCA 288 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/29bdj>, retrieved on 2024-08-28
