The failure of the duty to disclose in the context of obtaining informed consent was addressed in Reibl v. Hughes, 1980 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880 where Laskin J. sought to explain the implications of the term in relation to the tort of battery and the law of negligence. He concluded that it was generally preferable to treat the duty to disclose as an aspect of negligence. For the purposes of this case I would differentiate the duty to disclose from the obligation to perform the procedure with reasonable competence. While both may belong in the realm of negligence, it is my view that on these facts the former does not require expert evidence while the latter does. Are the dentists vicariously liable?
"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.