The plaintiffs appealed a summary judgment dismissing their medical malpractice action against two paramedics and an ambulance service.
The motion judge had found that while the standard of care was a genuine issue for trial, causation was not, relying on the defendants' expert opinion that the patient's survival rate was only 2.4 percent.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge erred in relying on the defendants' expert opinion because it did not address the plaintiffs' theory of the case, which posited that the patient would have survived had she been transported to the hospital immediately while she still had a heartbeat.
The Court concluded that both standard of care and causation were genuine issues requiring a trial.
