More recently, in Gregory v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2011 BCCA 144, Garson J.A., for the court, described the test as a subjective/objective test, “That is whether the reasonable patient, having all the information at hand that the plaintiff possessed, ought reasonably to have undergone the recommended treatment. The second aspect of the test is “the extent, if any to which the plaintiff’s damages would have been reduced” by that treatment” (at para. 56, emphasis in original). …
"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.