Gérald R. Tremblay

The plaintiff sued her attending physicians and a prosthesis manufacturer for medical malpractice, claiming damages for pain, suffering, and reactive depression.

During examination on discovery, the defendants sought disclosure of the plaintiff's psychiatric records.

The plaintiff refused, citing professional secrecy.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that by claiming damages for psychological harm, the plaintiff implicitly waived the confidentiality of her medical records.

The defendants demonstrated the apparent relevance of the records for their defence, and the trial judge correctly dismissed the plaintiff's objection to disclosure.

The appellant challenged the constitutionality and administrative validity of a Quebec regulatory provision respecting the colour of margarine.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the provision falls within provincial jurisdiction over local trade, does not infringe freedom of expression under the Charter, and was clearly authorized by its enabling legislation.

The appellant was severely injured in a car accident and treated by the respondent orthopaedic surgeon.

The respondent failed to diagnose a spinal fracture, leading to delayed immobilization, and the appellant was eventually diagnosed with paraparesis.

The trial judge found no fault and no causation.

The Court of Appeal found the respondent committed a fault by failing to conduct proper neurological tests and immobilize the patient, but upheld the trial judge's conclusion that the accident itself, not the medical fault, caused the paraparesis.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, affirming the Court of Appeal's intervention on the standard of care and its factual findings on causation, and declined to apply a presumption of causation.

The CRTC granted Bell Canada an interim rate increase in 1984, subject to review.

In 1986, after a final hearing, the CRTC determined that the interim rates had yielded excess revenues of $206 million and ordered Bell Canada to distribute this amount to customers via a one-time credit.

The Federal Court of Appeal quashed the order.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the CRTC's appeal, holding that the power to make interim orders under the Railway Act and National Transportation Act necessarily implies the power to review those rates retrospectively and to make remedial orders, such as a one-time credit, if the interim rates are found to be unjust or unreasonable.