The appellant appealed a jury verdict dismissing her medical malpractice claims against the respondent doctor, who inadvertently punctured her radial artery while attempting to aspirate a ganglion cyst.
The appellant argued the jury's verdict and nil damages assessment were unreasonable, and that the trial judge misdirected the jury.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the jury was entitled to reject the appellant's evidence and conclude the doctor met the standard of care for informed consent.
The court also found no reviewable errors in the trial judge's jury charge and held that the standard practice for removing a ganglion cyst is not fraught with obvious risks.
