The question of what is required by the standard of care is a question of law that is decided at trial by the trial judge with regard to the circumstances of each case (subject to appeal to the Court of Appeal if not correct in law). The questions of whether the defendant breached the standard of care, and if so, whether that breach was the actual and legal cause of the plaintiff's injury (and any losses or expenses claimed as result of that injury) are questions of fact that are decided at trial by the trial judge or jury (subject to appeal to the Court of Appeal if not supported by the evidence). However, in order to provide a basis for all of those questions to be decided in favor of the plaintiff, it is usually necessary for the plaintiff to call medical practitioners to testify about:

• the knowledge, skill and judgment expected of a normal, prudent medical practitioner of the defendant’s special group; and 
   
• the causal link between the patient’s injury and the defendant's failure to possess or exercise that knowledge, skill or judgment

Often, it is necessary for the plaintiff to call at least one medical practitioner to testify at trial about the expected knowledge, skill and judgment, and at least another medical practitioner to testify about causation.

The defendant will usually call two or more practitioners to testify in rebuttal to the evidence of each of the medical practitioners called by the plaintiff to testify about the expected knowledge, skill and judgment or about causation.
 

Return to: Probability of Judgment