The respondent, a diabetic, developed a foot sore and consulted the appellant physician, who failed to examine the foot or arrange follow-up care.
The sore became infected, leading to a below-the-knee amputation.
The trial judge found the physician negligent and held that the negligence denied the respondent a 'window of opportunity' to save her leg.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed the decision, finding that the respondent failed to prove causation on a balance of probabilities.
The medical evidence established only a loss of a chance to save the leg, which is not compensable in medical malpractice cases.
