Nathan H. Smith

The plaintiff sued her physician for the costs of raising her daughter, who was born with congenital injuries caused by maternal chickenpox.

The plaintiff alleged that had the physician properly advised her of the risks, she would have terminated the pregnancy.

The trial judge dismissed the claim, finding that the plaintiff would not have aborted the pregnancy even if fully informed.

The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial, holding the trial judge applied the wrong test for causation.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and restored the trial judge's decision, affirming the modified objective test for causation in medical malpractice cases.

The appellant contractor successfully bid on a road building contract and entered into a contract with the province.

The contractor alleged it lost money due to errors in the specifications and construction drawings prepared by the respondent engineering firm.

The contractor sued the engineering firm and the individual engineers for negligent misrepresentation.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the engineering firm owed a duty of care to the contractor, as the firm knew contractors would rely on its tender documents.

The contract between the contractor and the province did not negate this duty.

However, the Court dismissed the claim against the individual engineers, finding that merely affixing a professional seal to the documents was insufficient to establish a duty of care.