Not all claims against medical doctors require expert opinion evidence that the applicable standard of care was not met

It is commonly believed that expert opinion is always necessary to establish a medical malpractice breach of duty.  Vandergiessen v. Trillium Health Centre (Mississauga), 2010 ONCA 379, released online today, shows that is not correct:

[6]              In our respectful view, the motion judge erred by granting summary judgment on this record.  Not all claims against medical doctors require expert opinion evidence that the applicable standard of care was not met: see ter Nuezen v. Korn, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 674 at paras. 40-49.  While the appellant may be unable to establish elements of her claim without an expert opinion, the claims advanced by the appellant against the respondents involve more than a typical allegation of medical malpractice.  The appellant claims that statutory procedures and statutory conditions for her involuntary committal were not followed or satisfied.  In our view, these allegations fall into the category of claims that may be established without an expert opinion.  They are not matters that rest solely upon the opinion of experts as to whether the requisite standard of care was met.