Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Critique Of Canadian Jurisprudence On The Therapeutic Privilege Exception To Informed Consent, Michael Hadskis
A Critique Of Canadian Jurisprudence On The Therapeutic Privilege Exception To Informed Consent, Michael Hadskis
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
The Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decisions in Hopp v Lepp and Reibl v Hughes furnished a general analytical framework for informed consent actions that remains fully intact today. This article sets its gaze on a specific aspect of the framework, dubbed “therapeutic privilege,” that permits physicians to deviate from their general duty to disclose material, treatment-related risks to competent patients. Specifically, the privilege allows information about material risks to be withheld or generalized if physicians believe their patients are “unable to cope” with receiving such information. It is argued that the Supreme Court’s terse and vaguely-articulated exception to truth …
Judging The Social Sciences In Carter V Canada (Ag), Jodi Lazare
Judging The Social Sciences In Carter V Canada (Ag), Jodi Lazare
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
This paper examines a recent example of evidence-based decision making affecting social policy at the trial court level. It offers a close reading of Carter v Canada (AG), decided by the British Columbia Supreme Court, and of Justice Lynn Smith's careful scrutiny of the social science evidence when invalidating the Criminal Code prohibition on assistance in dying. Drawing on literature which examines the legal system's use of social science evidence and expert witnesses, this paper suggests that Justice Smith's treatment of the evidence in Carter provides an example of skilled judicial treatment of the extensive amounts of social science evidence …
In Defence Of Consent And Capacity Boards For End-Of-Life Care, Jocelyn Downie, Michael Hadskis
In Defence Of Consent And Capacity Boards For End-Of-Life Care, Jocelyn Downie, Michael Hadskis
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In Cuthbertson v. Rasouli, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) found that, in Ontario, it is the Consent and Capacity Board (CCB) and not the courts per se who will resolve conflicts between substitute decision-makers (SDMs) and health practitioners regarding the withdrawal of lifesustaining treatment from incapable patients. This finding was based on the SCC’s interpretation of the Ontario Health Care Consent Act (HCCA). Hawryluck et al. express concern about the SCC’s determination that the CCB is charged with resolving such conflicts since, in their view, this body is ill-equipped to fulfill this role. Instead, they take the position that …
Demythologizing Phosita: Applying The Non-Obviousness Requirement Under Canadian Patent Law To Keep Knowledge In The Public Domain & Foster Innovation, Matthew Herder
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
The Supreme Court of Canada recently revised the doctrine of non-obviousness in a pharmaceutical “selection patent” case, Apotex Inc. v. Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc. Although cognizant of changes to the same doctrine in the United States and the United Kingdom, a critical flaw in how the doctrine is being applied in Canada escaped the Court’s attention. Using content analysis methodology, this article shows that Canadian courts frequently fail to characterize the “person having ordinary skill in the art” (PHOSITA) for the purpose of the obviousness inquiry. The article argues that this surprisingly common analytical mistake betrays a deep misunderstanding of innovation, …