Foreseeability and risk of harm in a standard of care assessment

Conclusion

As demonstrated in the above cases, foreseeability of harm and risk to the patient are inextricably integrated into the determination of the standard of care applicable to medical care providers, including whether that standard of care has been breached. These concepts play other roles in medical malpractice litigation which are broad, and in certain cases, remain to be considered. The pending judgment by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Hemmings v Peng case will likely provide helpful parameters on how to assess foreseeability of risk and legal causation in medical malpractice cases.

1. 2022 ONSC 2674, 2024 ONCA 318
2. ter Neuzen v. Korn, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 674, 127 D.L.R. (4th) 577 at para 33.
3. Ibid, at para 34.
4. Ibid, at paras 38-40.
5. Ibid, at para 41.
6. Ibid, at para 19.
7. Ediger (Guardian ad litem of) v. Johnston, 2009 BCSC 386 at para 49.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Ediger (Guardian ad litem of) v. Johnston, 2013 SCC 18 at para 44 [Ediger (SCC)].
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid, at para 45.
13. 2025 ABKB 472
14. Ibid, at para 17.
15. Ibid, at para 18.
16. Ibid, at para 28.
17. Ibid, at para 258.
18. Ibid, at para 31.
19. Ewashko v. Hugo, 2025 ABKB 295
20. Ibid, at para 128.
21. 2024 BCCA 74
22. Ibid, at para 25
23. Ibid, at para 57.