Can a medical professional be held liable for errors in judgment?

It is trite law that medical professionals cannot be held liable for mere errors of judgment which are distinguishable from professional fault. An error in judgment does not amount to negligence where the physician appropriately exercises clinical judgment. See: Wilson v. Swanson 1956 CanLII 1 (SCC), [1956] S.C.J. No. 58.

Whether or not the physician was negligent or simply exercised an error in judgment will be determined on a case-by-case basis having regard to the particular facts in each case: A diagnosis is above all, an exercise of the physician’s judgment based on his training, experience and perhaps, intuition. It is trite to say that a physician is not liable for injuries flowing from errors of judgment (as opposed to actual negligence). The real difficulty lies in determining whether injurious behaviour by a physician was negligent or merely an error in judgment and it is the facts in each case which would determine the answer to this crucial question. See: Dean v. York County Hospital et al [1979] O.J. No. 348. No retrospective judgement or hindsight

A defendant doctor cannot be judged in hindsight, as the conduct of a physician must be judged in light of the knowledge that should have been reasonably within his or her possession at the time of the alleged act of negligence. Courts must not, with the benefit of hindsight, judge too harshly doctors who acted in accordance with the prevailing standard of care at the time of the accident. In LaPoint v. Hôpital de Gardeur 1992 CanLII 119 (SCC), [1992] S.C.J. No. 11 at paras. 27-29, it was said: Courts should be careful not to rely upon the perfect vision afforded by hindsights. In order to evaluate a particular exercise of judgment fairly, the doctor’s limited ability to foresee future events when determining a course of conduct must be kept in mind. Otherwise, the doctor will not be assessed according to the norms of the average doctor of reasonable ability in the same circumstances, but rather will be held accountable for mistakes that are apparent only after the fact. The requirement for expert evidence