Shields v. Shortt

Shields v. Shortt

The appeal is dismissed because the summary trial judge reasonably concluded, on the evidence and the long unexplained delay in obtaining expert opinion, that expert evidence was almost certainly unobtainable and that the plaintiff's allegations of negligence and lack of consent were bound to fail, justifying...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2001 BCCA 80
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): Denise Shields; Defendant (respondent): Stanley G. Shortt; Defendant (respondent): Greater Victoria Hospital Society; Defendant (respondent): John Doe; Defendant (respondent): Jane Doe; Defendant (respondent): Dr. Herbert N. Fitterman; Defendant (respondent): St. Paul's Hospital
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (medical Negligence/tort) / Appeal From Summary Trial Under Rule 18 a After Dismissal of Actions at Summary Trial
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of summary trial affirmed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment/rule 18 a, Expert Evidence Requirement in Medical Malpractice, Adjournment Discretion, Standard of Review on Summary Determination
Source Language
english
Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Consent to Medical Treatment Summary Judgment/rule 18 a Expert Evidence Requirement in Medical Malpractice Adjournment Discretion Standard of Review on Summary Determination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Denise Shields

Plaintiff (appellant)

Stanley G. Shortt

Defendant (respondent)

Greater Victoria Hospital Society

Defendant (respondent)

John Doe

Defendant (respondent)

Jane Doe

Defendant (respondent)

Dr. Herbert N. Fitterman

Defendant (respondent)

St. Paul's Hospital

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (medical Negligence/tort) / Appeal From Summary Trial Under Rule 18 a After Dismissal of Actions at Summary Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was unjust to decide the case on a Rule 18A summary trial
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence (including expert evidence) to establish negligence or lack of consent
  3. 3 Whether the summary trial judge abused his discretion in refusing to adjourn to permit obtaining expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the summary trial judge reasonably concluded, on the evidence and the long unexplained delay in obtaining expert opinion, that expert evidence was almost certainly unobtainable and that the plaintiff's allegations of negligence and lack of consent were bound to fail, justifying dismissal under Rule 18A.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of summary trial affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Dismissal of both actions against all defendants affirmed