Dr. John Smith

The appellant obstetrician appealed a jury's finding of negligence and causation in a birth injury case, arguing the jury misapplied the "but for" test and that the verdict was unreasonable due to lack of evidence on timely delivery.

The appellant also claimed the trial judge improperly questioned witnesses.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the jury's application of the "but for" test, finding the verdict reasonable based on expert evidence, and concluding the trial judge's questions were proper clarifications within established judicial protocol.

The appellant, charged with aggravated sexual assault, was referred to a psychiatrist by his counsel.

The appellant detailed plans to kidnap, rape, and kill prostitutes.

The psychiatrist concluded the appellant posed a severe and imminent danger to the public and sought to disclose this information despite solicitor-client privilege.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that solicitor-client privilege may be set aside where there is a clear, serious, and imminent threat to public safety.

The Court ordered the disclosure of the portions of the psychiatrist's affidavit that fell within this public safety exception.