Dr. Muller

This ruling addresses requested changes to the jury charge in a medical negligence trial concerning the standard of care and the admissibility and weight of evidence regarding minority medical practice, usual practice, and the distinction between buttock numbness and saddle anaesthesia.

The court reviews the law on minority practice, the role of expert evidence, and the proper approach to weighing conflicting testimony, ultimately declining to make certain amendments requested by the defendant and clarifying the law for the jury.

The worker, an educational assistant, was head-butted by a special needs student, sustaining a concussion and psychological injuries.

The worker appealed the Case Manager's decisions denying entitlement for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and post-traumatic vision syndrome.

The Appeals Resolution Officer allowed the appeal in part, granting entitlement for PTSD based on the WSIB Mental Health Specialty Clinic's assessment, finding the accident was objectively traumatic.

However, the claim for post-traumatic vision syndrome was denied, as multiple neurological assessments found no organic basis for a visual system impairment.

Ali Hilal was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault and sexual interference with his stepdaughter, M.W., from age 9 to 13.

The offences involved multiple incidents, including vaginal intercourse, and occurred over four years, intensifying during pandemic restrictions.

The victim suffered severe long-term emotional and psychological impact, including estrangement from her mother and younger siblings.

The Crown sought 8-10 years imprisonment, while the defence sought 5-7 years, acknowledging ancillary orders.

The court imposed an eight-year term of imprisonment, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence, and ordered various ancillary measures including DNA order, SOIRA registration for 20 years, a 10-year s. 161 order, and a lifetime firearms prohibition.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits, claiming that a motor vehicle accident caused her to subsequently develop meningitis and an empyema.

The applicant's expert theorized that the accident caused a rupture in the dura mater, allowing a middle ear infection to migrate to the brain.

The Tribunal found the expert's theory to be overly speculative and concluded that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the accident was a necessary cause of her meningitis.

The preliminary issue was answered in the negative.