Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Civil liability — Professional liability — Physicians and surgeons — Punitive damages — Class actions — Whether relationship between physician and user is statutory or contractual in nature where care provided in hospital — Whether booking of appointment by health institution based on availability dates provided by physicians can suffice to establish contractual relationship between users and physicians requiring physicians to be present on given date to provide care — In light of role played by institution in hospital planning, whether relationship between physician and health institutions is statutory or contractual — How physicians’ exercise of fundamental freedoms of association, expression and peaceful assembly enshrined in Charter of human rights and freedoms, CQLR, c. C-12, works in context of hospital practice — Whether Court of Appeal erred in reducing number of members of group — Whether Court of Appeal erred in not finding that Fédération had unlawfully and intentionally interfered with dignity of members of group.

In 2002 and 2003, the Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec was in conflict with the Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux. Among other things, it was demanding better working conditions for its members. The Fédération therefore invited its members to a first study day on November 13, 2002. Except for emergency care, which was provided as if the day were a statutory holiday, many surgeries and medical appointments were therefore postponed throughout the province’s health institutions. The event was organized in response to the passage of a special act by the National Assembly, the Act to ensure the continued provision of emergency medical services, S.Q. 2002, c. 39, which, in the Fédération’s view, undermined the professional independence of physicians. The Fédération later organized two more similar study days on December 2, 2002 and January 16, 2003 using the same model and with the same consequences. Nelida Flores Bendezu, the designated person in the proceedings, was supposed to have an operation on November 13. Since her doctor planned to participate in the study day organized by the Fédération on that date, the hospital notified her on November 12 that her operation was being cancelled and postponed due to her physician’s absence. She alleged that the additional wait had caused her stress and pain.

In October 2003, the Conseil pour la protection des malades instituted a class action against the Fédération, criticizing it for organizing three study days that had resulted in surgeries and pre-surgery examinations being postponed and cancelled. It alleged that the Fédération knew that the medical specialists had a duty to provide their patients with care during those three days under the Charter of human rights and freedoms, CQLR, c. C-12, the Act respecting health services and social services, CQLR, c. S-4.2, and the Code of ethics of physicians, but had encouraged them not to comply with that obligation. The Conseil claimed $7,500,000 in moral and exemplary damages from the Fédération for the members of the group covered by the class action.