What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff acted unreasonably in failing to obtain the recommended treatment?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Naidu v. Mann, 2007 BCSC 1313 (CanLII):

The onus is on the defendants to prove both that the plaintiff acted unreasonably in failing to obtain the recommended treatment, and the extent to which the plaintiff’s damages would have been reduced had she acted reasonably: Chiu v. Chiu, 2002 BCCA 618 at para. 57.

Other Questions


What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff acted unreasonably by not pursuing a recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff acted unreasonably in following treatment recommendations? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff acted unreasonably in not following the recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff acted unreasonably in eschewing the recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff would have received the recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff has unreasonably failed to take steps that would have reduced her damages? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff is entitled to equal treatment in the context of non-pecuniary damages? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a reasonable patient has followed a recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a reasonable patient has followed the recommended treatment? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant acted unreasonably when driving under the influence of alcohol? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.