Standard of care is the legal benchmark for the conduct expected of physicians, nurses, and other regulated health professionals in Ontario. It is the first of the three elements a plaintiff must prove in a medical malpractice claim, and it is almost always proven or defended through the evidence of qualified medical experts.
Posts tagged Standard of Care analyze how Ontario courts have applied the test in specific cases, how expert evidence is used to define what a reasonable practitioner would have done in the circumstances, and where the standard is contested between specialties. The library covers obstetrical, emergency, surgical, anesthetic, and primary care decisions, along with appellate rulings that shape how trial courts approach the question.
For patients considering a claim, these case comments offer a sense of what Ontario courts have treated as a departure from the standard of care and what they have not.
Ontario Superior Court finds pediatric neurologists negligent for delayed pyridoxine treatment in PDE. The low-risk alternative framework and twin sister causation.
Alberta King’s Bench dismisses critical care malpractice claim. Standard of care breached on echocardiography timing, but causation defeated by temporal mismatch.
The BC Supreme Court dismisses a missed-appendicitis claim. Normal ultrasound, documented differential diagnosis, and the anchoring bias allegation rejected.
When a surgical complication is extreme and rare, the trier of fact can infer negligence from the outcome itself. Trial win on shoulder replacement nerve injury.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of a failure-to-refer claim. Breach of standard of care, but causation defeated by referral wait times.
A settlement on behalf of a 40-year-old woman whose hysterectomy was described as uncomplicated but resulted in injuries to both ureters and chronic disability.
A 17-day birth injury trial. Battery, informed consent, five negligence allegations, and causation all addressed and rejected. A multi-ground defence dismissal.
The Court of Appeal affirmed plaintiff causation in a stroke malpractice case, holding that defendants cannot rely on evidentiary gaps their own negligence created.
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.
The Court of Appeal affirmed a $12 million plaintiff verdict for catastrophic maternal brain injury, rejecting the defence theory of amniotic fluid embolism.
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.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.