What are the clinical records admissible in a medical malpractice trial without calling a doctor?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Seaman v. Crook, 2003 BCSC 464 (CanLII):

The plaintiff further states that the clinical records meet the requirement of necessity and are, therefore, admissible even without calling the doctor, because the doctor would have no independent memory of his treatment of the patient and would have to rely on his clinical records if called to testify (see: Ares v. Venner, supra).

Other Questions


Is there an exception to a trial judge's ruling in a medical malpractice case where a physiotherapist and a treating physician recorded statements in a clinical record? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the clinical records of a doctor admissible for the purposes of medical malpractice? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can statements made to doctors as recorded in clinical records qualify as business records? (British Columbia, Canada)
How has the BCSC treated records of medical malpractice in medical malpractices? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of the evidentiary use of clinical records in medical malpractice cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the entire agreement clause in a medical malpractice case apply to all medical malpractices? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff is entitled to medical malpractice compensation even without objective evidence from her doctor? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the duty of disclosure of medical malpractice in medical malpractices? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are some examples of the evidentiary use of clinical records in medical malpractice cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the clinical judgment of a doctor in a medical malpractice case? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.