It has been held that two distinct issues must be determined in a claim based on an allegation of a lack of informed consent (Reibl v. Hughes, 1980 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880; Turkington v. Lai, 2007 CanLII 48993 (ON S.C.J.) at paras. 41, 45): (a) Did the doctor fulfill his duty of disclosure, that is, did the doctor disclose the material, special or unusual risks that a reasonable person in the patient’s position would want to know; (b) If the material information had been disclosed would a reasonable person in the patient’s position have declined the treatment?
"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.