The appellant underwent a laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and subsequently developed a severe infection and an ileovaginal fistula.
She sued her gynecologist and the general surgeon who performed a subsequent exploratory laparotomy for medical malpractice, alleging a burn injury to her small bowel caused the fistula.
The trial judge dismissed the action, finding no breach of the standard of care and that the fistula was caused by infection, not a burn.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's findings of fact and concluding that the 'but for' test for causation was correctly applied.
