Posts tagged Defendant Win analyze Ontario medical malpractice cases in which the defendant physician, hospital, or other health professional was successful at trial, on a dispositive motion, or on appeal. Defendant wins are the more common outcome in medical malpractice litigation, reflecting the high evidentiary burden on plaintiffs and the structural defences available to well-represented health professionals.
Defendant wins fall into several patterns: cases where the court accepted the defendant’s expert evidence on standard of care; cases where the plaintiff proved breach but failed to prove causation; cases dismissed on limitation grounds; cases dismissed at summary judgment following Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, [2014] 1 SCR 87; cases where the plaintiff’s expert evidence was ruled inadmissible or given little weight; and cases dismissed mid-trial on a non-suit motion.
Studying defendant wins is as informative as studying plaintiff wins, often more so. Each decision identifies the evidentiary gap or legal defect that ended the case, which in turn shows what a successful plaintiff would have needed to prove instead. Posts under this tag analyze the specific reason the case failed and the practical implications for similar future claims.
BC court dismisses ED malpractice claim involving missed subarachnoid hemorrhage where patient lacked thunderclap headache and the bleed had not yet occurred.
Ontario court dismisses orthopaedic malpractice claim after finding hip replacement subsidence was osteointegration failure, a recognized complication, not negligence.
A 17-day birth injury trial. Battery, informed consent, five negligence allegations, and causation all addressed and rejected. A multi-ground defence dismissal.
A failed obstetric epidural with a fractured needle did not prove substandard technique. The British Columbia court rejected outcome-based reasoning on both grounds.
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.
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.
A claim alleging that psychiatrists failed to disclose dose increases during a course of ECT was dismissed mid-trial for absence of expert evidence. The BC Court of Appeal affirmed.
The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial after a trial judge discharged the jury on her own motion and dismissed the malpractice claim with reasons 90% copied from the defence.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.