What is the defence of failing to explain why a test for penetration has failed?

Alberta, Canada


The following excerpt is from Feist v. Gordon, 1990 ABCA 251 (CanLII):

This defence does not assist the appellant. It is not an answer to a finding of negligent penetration. Nor do the medical reports of unexplained failures of the test convert to a statistical margin of error acceptable in law. As pointed out by Sopinka, J. in Farrell v. Snell, medical experts determine causation in terms of medical certainties and not by the legal concept of negligence. To say that failures of the test are not medically explained does not make them inconsistent with negligence in law.

Other Questions


In what circumstances will the City be found prejudiced in its defence of failing to provide notice of a piece of debris? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the decisive ground of appeal in a sexual assault case where the trial judge failed to relate the evidence crucial to the defence to the issues to be decided by the jury? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the test for a driver who failed two breath tests for failing to show up to .08? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are some cases where a plaintiff was found to have failed to mitigate her losses as a result of failing to receive cortisone injections and physiotherapy? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a personal trainer have been found to have failed to mitigate damages for failing to attend physiotherapy? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the defence have to be limited in its defence in the defence or preparation for trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
If a defence expert has been videotaped at trial, is the defence expert required to be reviewed by the other defence expert? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the defence of a defence where the defence cannot raise a reasonable doubt by mere speculation? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the elements of the defence in the defence of duress? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the defence of self-defence? (New Brunswick, Canada)