Is the but for test unworkable in medical malpractice cases?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Aristorenas v. Comcare Health Services, 2006 CanLII 33850 (ON CA):
One of the circumstances in which the "but for" test is potentially unworkable is in medical malpractice cases where [page288] scientific proof of causation is simply not attainable. In such cases, although the ultimate burden of proof remains with the plaintiff, a court is entitled to take a "robust and pragmatic approach" to the fact finding component of the causation analysis: see Snell v. Farrell at p. 330 S.C.R.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the case law on medical malpractice in the context of medical negligence cases? (Ontario, Canada)
How have courts dealt with medical malpractices in the context of medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case authorities in the context of a medical malpractice case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on disclosure of medical records in medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
In a medical malpractice case, is a plaintiff entitled to access his medical records and charts? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a standard medical practice negligent in a medical malpractice case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the impact of a medical malpractice case on the economic impact of the case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on the admissibility of expert evidence in medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on expert testimony in medical malpractice cases? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on medical malpractice in the context of medical negligence? (Ontario, Canada)
