
Lal v Anderson: A Jury Notice Upheld in a Complex Birth Injury Case
A defence motion to strike a jury notice was dismissed in a complex BC birth injury case involving 31 expert reports and 35 anticipated witnesses.
Representing Victims of Medical Malpractice Across Ontario
Case comments analyze decisions of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and other Canadian courts in medical malpractice litigation. Each post takes a single decision and works through what happened, how the court applied the standard of care, causation, and damages frameworks to the facts, what the expert evidence said, and what the practical implications are for similar future claims.
The archive covers Ontario civil decisions across the full range of medical malpractice practice: obstetric and birth injury cases, missed and delayed diagnoses, surgical and anaesthetic errors, hospital negligence, informed consent claims, and procedural matters such as limitation periods and expert evidence challenges. It also includes appellate decisions from outside Ontario where the reasoning is likely to be persuasive in Ontario courts, particularly from the Supreme Court of Canada and the appellate courts of British Columbia.
Case comments are written for two audiences. Practising lawyers, law students, and judicial researchers can use them as a working library of recent Ontario medical malpractice doctrine. Prospective clients and patients can use them to see how courts have approached fact patterns similar to their own. The substance is the same for both audiences; only the framing of the takeaway changes.
Posts in this category are organized by the tags applied to each comment, allowing readers to filter by clinical specialty, legal concept, court, or outcome.

A defence motion to strike a jury notice was dismissed in a complex BC birth injury case involving 31 expert reports and 35 anticipated witnesses.

A surgeon was found liable for failing to disclose laparoscopic hernia repair as an alternative, even though the open repair he performed met the standard of care.

A defence motion for a neuropsychological assessment was refused eight years after the statement of defence in a complex pediatric malpractice case.

A self-represented plaintiff’s Lyme disease delayed-diagnosis claim was dismissed at summary judgment after his sole expert witness was disqualified.

A delayed-diagnosis cancer claim was dismissed at standard of care and causation, with a 40% contributory negligence finding for repeated failures to follow up.

A BC trial judge found an obstetrician 85% liable and obstetrical nurses 15% liable for skull fractures and brain damage caused during a difficult caesarean section.

A psychiatrist was seriously assaulted by a patient. The BC Court of Appeal confirmed that hospitals owe a duty of care to medical staff, and that the standard is contextual.

A BC court certified a class action against a hospital that allegedly hired an imposter nurse. Some causes of action were certified; others were left to individual claims.

A trial judge dismissed a medical malpractice claim against two ER physicians, finding the standard of care was met and that earlier testing would not have changed the outcome.

Three physicians on a multi-disciplinary team failed to obtain informed consent for an elective AVM procedure. The Court of Appeal upheld an $8.5M judgment.

A community hospital ER physician failed to insist on the urgent transfer of a patient with a pulseless limb. The trial judge found liability for the lost leg.

A trial judge found an obstetrician applied excessive traction during a shoulder dystocia, causing a permanent brachial plexus injury. Liability was established.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.