Informed consent is a separate ground of liability in Ontario medical malpractice law, distinct from negligent treatment. A physician who performs a procedure without obtaining the patient’s consent at all may be liable in battery. A physician who obtains consent but fails to disclose the material risks and alternatives to a proposed treatment may be liable in negligence for any resulting harm.
The leading Canadian authority is Reibl v Hughes, [1980] 2 SCR 880, which established a modified objective test for causation in informed consent cases: would a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s particular circumstances have refused the treatment had the risks been properly disclosed? Hopp v Lepp, [1980] 2 SCR 192, set out the scope of the physician’s disclosure obligation.
Informed consent cases turn on the materiality of the undisclosed risk, the quality of the consent discussion, the adequacy of the documentation, and the credibility of the patient’s evidence about what they would have done with full information.
Posts tagged Informed Consent analyze how Ontario courts have applied the Reibl framework in surgical, obstetrical, and procedural fact patterns, including cases on the scope of disclosure and on the modified objective test for causation.
Doctors warn against an overwhelming surge of online menopause misinformation. The legal framework where patient harm crosses into medical malpractice in Ontario.
Ontario discipline tribunal imposes four-month suspension, practice restrictions, and mandatory supervision on chronic pain physician with pattern of prior concerns.
New Brunswick court holds anesthesiologist negligent in death of 36-year-old patient with severe obesity and sepsis after spinal anesthesia choice and management.
Ontario Superior Court finds pediatric neurologists negligent for delayed pyridoxine treatment in PDE. The low-risk alternative framework and twin sister causation.
A 17-day birth injury trial. Battery, informed consent, five negligence allegations, and causation all addressed and rejected. A multi-ground defence dismissal.
An Ontario orthopaedic surgeon was found liable after removing clavicle hardware six weeks early without revisiting his own documented treatment plan.
On December 1, 2023, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed a medical malpractice lawsuit brought by a young woman who suffered a stroke after taking birth control medication provided by her family physician who allegedly failed to advise her of the increased risk of stroke associated with that particular brand of birth control pill (Yaz).
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 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 patient’s guide to surgical malpractice in Ontario. The three phases of care, the evidentiary challenges, and what it takes to prove a viable claim.
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.
Most bad outcomes in medicine are not malpractice. After two decades of these cases in Ontario, here are the signs worth taking seriously.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.