The appellant underwent surgery performed by the respondent surgeon to remove an occlusion in his carotid artery.
During or immediately following the surgery, the appellant suffered a massive stroke leaving him paralyzed.
The appellant sued for damages, alleging he was not informed of the specific risk of stroke from the surgery itself.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that failure to disclose risks sounds in negligence, not battery.
The Court established that the duty of disclosure requires a surgeon to inform a patient of all material risks.
Furthermore, the Court adopted a modified objective test for causation, asking whether a reasonable person in the patient's particular position would have foregone the surgery if properly informed.
The Court found the surgeon breached his duty and that a reasonable person in the appellant's position, being close to a vested pension and facing no immediate emergency, would have declined the surgery.
The trial judgment awarding damages was restored.
