In giving the judgment for the court, Mr. Justice Sharpe discussed many of the cases to which I have referred on causation. He did not think it appropriate to depart from the rule that the plaintiff must prove on the balance of probabilities that the breach of the doctor's duty caused the loss of her leg, in other words, the 'but for' test. In his opinion, the evidence went no further than to show the plaintiff suffered the loss of a chance of saving her leg by prompt medical attention and in the medical malpractice area, recovery on that basis was unavailable: Laferrière v. Lawson, 1991 CanLII 87 (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 541.
"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.