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.
Articles on this site are for general information only and do not constitute legal advice. Reading articles does not create a lawyer-client relationship.
Rule 53.08 was tightened in 2022 to stop the routine late service of expert reports. In Pelrine v Chung, the Divisional Court held that the correction can be overdone, and that the interests of justice apply throughout the rule rather than only at its second stage. Two excluded defence reports were let in, thirteen months before a jury trial.
A registered practical nurse admitted failures across two Guelph hospitals: an admission assessment backdated without notation, medications charted but never given, and a bladder scan reported but not performed. The CNO Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission for a three-month suspension with twelve months of oversight. What the electronic audit trail proved, and where a discipline finding stops short of a civil claim.
In the certified Moncton oxytocin class action, a New Brunswick court has ordered the defendant nurse’s personnel file produced, rejected most of the hospital’s quality-improvement privilege claims, and refused to disclose the private health records of other patients. The disclosure reasoning is persuasive only in Ontario, but it tracks the Ontario approach closely.
Some of the most common beliefs about medical malpractice in Ontario are simply wrong, and they cut both ways: pushing some people toward hopeless claims and others away from good ones. Here are the misunderstandings I see most often, set against how the law actually works, from what counts as negligence to limitation periods, College complaints, causation, and the cap on damages.
Norman Clarey nearly died after a bowel resection led to a failed anastomosis and a permanent stoma. A Prince Edward Island court nonetheless dismissed his negligence, breach of contract, and informed consent claims, finding Dr. Gillis met the standard of care throughout and that causation was not proven. As an out-of-province decision it is persuasive but not binding in Ontario, though it applies largely Ontario and Supreme Court of Canada authority.
A new report finds one in 10 admitted patients now spend more than 48 hours waiting in the emergency department, and roughly 16,000 died while waiting for care last year. But a broken system is not the same as a winnable malpractice claim. Here is where an ER delay can cross into negligence in Ontario, and where it cannot.
The Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal in Brown v Meaney, upholding findings that two pediatric neurologists breached the standard of care and the duty to obtain informed consent when they abandoned a pyridoxine trial in an infant with a rare epilepsy. The decision affirms that a defensible first impression does not excuse the failure to revisit it, and that causation need not be proven with scientific precision.
Hamilton Spectator coverage of Dr. Stefan Konasiewicz, whose six-month suspension could end in August. Paul Cahill comments on why a patient death led the discipline tribunal to remediation rather than revocation, and where a College proceeding ends and a civil claim begins.
A cosmetic surgery clinic recorded patients in consultation rooms and the operating room without telling them. In J.C. v Jugenburg, 2026 ONSC 3061, the court awarded $21.5 million in aggregate damages and $1 million in punitive damages, and clarified how intrusion upon seclusion applies inside the doctor-patient relationship.