Noel v Hawrylyshyn: Battery, Informed Consent, and Urgent Operative Delivery
A 17-day birth injury trial. Battery, informed consent, five negligence allegations, and causation all addressed and rejected. A multi-ground defence dismissal.
Insights & Analysis
Informed.
Informed.
Equipped.
Empowered.
Plain-language insight on medical malpractice law in Ontario. Practical guidance, case analysis, and updates from a trial-focused practice. No legal jargon. No marketing fluff. Just what you need to know.
Find an Article
Or Browse by Topic
Articles on this site are for general information only and do not constitute legal advice. Reading articles does not create a lawyer-client relationship.
Hasan v Trillium: When the Defendant’s Negligence Creates the Evidentiary Gap
The Court of Appeal affirmed plaintiff causation in a stroke malpractice case, holding that defendants cannot rely on evidentiary gaps their own negligence created.
Bloody Stools, a Family History of Colon Cancer, and a Three-Year Diagnostic Delay
A settlement on behalf of a woman in her 60s whose family physician dismissed three years of GI symptoms despite a known family history of colon cancer.
Hemmings v Peng: When the Anaesthetic, Not AFE, Caused the Catastrophe
The Court of Appeal affirmed a $12 million plaintiff verdict for catastrophic maternal brain injury, rejecting the defence theory of amniotic fluid embolism.
Williamson v Wang: When a Broken Needle Doesn’t Prove a Breach
A failed obstetric epidural with a fractured needle did not prove substandard technique. The British Columbia court rejected outcome-based reasoning on both grounds.
Rogerson v Grey Bruce: Mandatory Reporting and the Causation Chain
The Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of a medical negligence claim alleging failure to report child protection concerns. The causation chain failed at multiple links.
Cross-Examining the Defence Expert at the OBA Anatomy of a Trial
How to cross-examine the defence expert and advance your case theory. From the 2024 OBA Anatomy of a Trial continuing professional development program.
Denman v Radovanovic: Cumulative Risks and the Treatment Team’s Duty to Inform
The Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed liability against three physicians for failure to disclose the cumulative risks of a multi-step brain AVM treatment plan.
Papineau v Romero-Sierra: When a Lyme Disease Claim Fails at the Diagnosis
A delayed Lyme disease claim against two Ontario physicians dismissed on multiple grounds, including the most fundamental: the plaintiff failed to prove he had Lyme disease.