What is the effect of the trial judge on the causation issue in cases involving intermittent catheterization?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Bruce v. Sookochoff, 1993 CanLII 714 (BC CA):
23 The conclusion of the trial judge on the causation issue was brief and to the point. This is what he said: Here, after considering the circumstances in this case, and the onus upon the plaintiff, I have decided that the plaintiff would not have undergone this surgery if the risk of continual incontinence was adequately explained to her. To paraphrase the question raised by Madam Justice McLachlin in Rawlings v. Lindsay at page 309, a reasonable person in her position, confronted with a choice between, optional surgery that carried a risk of continual incontinence, or the continuation of the intermittent catheterization, would most probably have decided against the surgery. The Plaintiff as a reasonable person would not have undergone the operation if she had a full knowledge of the risk and had been given full consideration of her own particular situation.
"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
Is a trial judge's failure to give reasons sufficient to determine that the trial judge erred in appreciation of a relevant issue or application of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does objection to an observation by a judge at a jury trial in a murder case have any effect on the outcome of the trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a summary trial judge make a finding that a matter is not suitable for disposition by way of summary trial during the hearing of the summary trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law in which the trial judge’s decision to accept or reject the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a trial judge has a duty to make a decision based on expert testimony? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are some cases where a plaintiff moved at trial to take a case out of Rule 66 and the trial took longer than two days? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden on a trial judge to be fully aware of the thousands of cases that may apply to admissibility issues? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law where the trial judge used the same language as it used at bar as it did at trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
When a single issue is proposed for summary trial by way of summary trial, does the court have any consideration in deciding the issue as a whole? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of the modified objective approach to the issue of causation in medical malpractice cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
