What is the burden of proving that a plaintiff's failure to follow the advice of doctors with respect to treatment is reasonable or unreasonable?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Delli Santi v. PNE, 2000 BCSC 716 (CanLII):

The defendant bears the burden of proving that a plaintiff could have and should have mitigated his or her loss. Whether a plaintiff's refusal to follow the advice of doctors with respect to treatment is reasonable or unreasonable is assessed on an objective standard: Janiak v. Ippolito (1985), 1985 CanLII 62 (SCC), 16 D.L.R. (4th) 1 (S.C.C.)

Other Questions


What is the burden of proving that a plaintiff’s failure to pursue recommended medical treatment contributed to their loss? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving a plaintiff’s failure to mitigate in a wrongful dismissal action? (Nova Scotia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving that a plaintiff’s considered decision not to undergo spinal fusion surgery is a failure to mitigate? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving a plaintiff’s failure to mitigate? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of a plaintiff's failure to attend for medical treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the applicable test for considering a plaintiff’s failure to follow recommended treatments? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving a plaintiff's claim against a doctor who failed to treat her properly? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the burden of proving an administrative body’s interpretation of its home statute was unreasonable? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving a plaintiff's injuries are not minor? (Nova Scotia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving a plaintiff’s claim for medical malpractice? (British Columbia, Canada)