The plaintiff was the wife of the deceased, who died during a cardiac procedure. He was taking part in a clinical research study. The plaintiff sued the doctors who performed the cardiac surgery and the medical researcher who headed up the clinic study. At trial, the jury dismissed the claims against the physicians. The claim against the medical researcher was based on a breach of fiduciary duty, so the judge was required to make a decision (per s.108 of the Courts of Justice Act). He held that there was a breach of fiduciary duty, and that he did not need to consider causation. The Court of Appeal overturned the judge’s decision, holding that the finding of fiduciary breach did not obviate the need to consider the issue of causation, and that causation could not be established. The Court of Appeal reviewed the applicable case law and confirmed that a plaintiff seeking compensation for breach of fiduciary duty must establish that the losses flowed from the breach. The Court of Appeal found that the plaintiff was not entitled to compensation because the breach did not cause the plaintiff to participate in the procedure that led to his death.
Menu