Coffin v. Shapter and Gander and District Hospital Board, (1984) 57 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 343 (NFDC)

• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: December 14, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1984), 57 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 343 (NFDC)

Coffin v. Shapter (1984), 57 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 343 (NFDC);

    170 A.P.R. 343

MLB headnote and full text

Coffin v. Shapter and Gander and District Hospital Board

(1983 No. 106)

Indexed As: Coffin v. Shapter and Gander and District Hospital Board

Newfoundland District Court

Judicial Centre of Grand Bank

Cummings, D.C.J.

December 14, 1984.

Summary:

A man brought an action for damages against a doctor, alleging negligence with respect to surgery performed by the doctor and in post-operative care, and against the hospital for negligence by its employees in failing to supply proper care and treatment. The doctor and the hospital applied for orders striking out the man's statement of claim on the ground that it was not commenced within the limitation period and that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

The Newfoundland District Court dismissed the applications by the doctor and the hospital.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 3268

Actions in tort - For professional services - Termination of services - In dismissing applications by a doctor and a hospital to strike out a plaintiff's statement of claim, on the ground that it was statute barred, the Newfoundland District Court discussed the issue of when medical services by a doctor terminate - See paragraphs 19 to 22.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 13

General principles - Conflict between limitation periods - A doctor and a hospital applied to strike out a plaintiff's statement of claim on the ground that it was statute barred because it was not brought within the limitation periods prescribed by s. 25A of the Medical Act and s. 37 of the Hospitals Act - In dismissing the applications the Newfoundland District Court examined the conflict between the two different limitation periods - See paragraphs 14 to 18 and 23.

Practice - Topic 2200

Pleadings - Striking out pleadings - General principles - A doctor and a hospital applied to strike out a plaintiff's statement of claim on the ground that the action was not commenced within the limitation period - The Newfoundland District Court dismissed the application because there was insufficient evidence presented with the applications to determine when services by the doctor were terminated and to then determine the appropriate limitation period - See paragraph 17.

Practice - Topic 2230

Pleadings - Striking out pleadings - Grounds - Failure to disclose a cause of action - A doctor and a hospital applied to strike out a plaintiff's statement of claim on the ground that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action - The Newfoundland District Court dismissed the application - The court held that there was insufficient evidence to grant the application - The court discussed the principles applied to strike out a statement of claim - See paragraphs 7 to 13 and 24.

Statutes - Topic 1626

Interpretation - Extrinsic aids - Similar statutes in other jurisdictions - A doctor in a hospital applied to strike out a plaintiff's statement of claim on the ground that it was statute barred because it was not brought within the limitation periods prescribed by s. 25A of the Medical Act (Nfld.) and s. 37 of the Hospitals Act (Nfld.) - In dismissing the application the Newfoundland District Court examined comparable legislation in Ontario - See paragraph 17.

Cases Noticed:

Jacques v. Ellis, [1925] 4 D.L.R. 782, consd. [para. 10].

Campbell and Campbell v. Sinnott and Charlottetown Clinic Management Co. (1984), 48 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 125; 142 A.P.R. 125, refd to. [para. 12].

Quinn v. Monaghan (1980), 27 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 13; 74 A.P.R. 13, consd. [para. 12].

Letto v. Mitra and Grenfell Regional Health Services Board (1984), 52 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 268; 153 A.P.R. 268, consd. [para. 16].

Dobson et al. v. Wellington Tavern (Windsor) Ltd. (1981), 124 D.L.R.(3d) 131; reversed 139 D.L.R.(3d) 255, consd. [para. 17].

Abbott and Steeves v. Cook (1980), 13 C.C.L.T. 264; 40 N.S.R.(2d) 614; 73 A.P.R. 614, consd. [para. 27].

Statutes Noticed:

Medical Act, S.N. 1974, c. 119, sect. 25A [paras. 3, 4, 5, 29].

Hospitals Act, S.N. 1971, c. 81, sect. 37 [paras. 3, 4, 5, 29]; sect. 40 [para. 15].

Rules of Court (Nfld.), Order 18, rule 26 [paras. 3, 8]; Order 24, rule 2 [paras. 8, 9, 26]; Order 24, rule 4 [paras. 3, 8, 9, 27]; Order 29, rule 6 [paras. 5, 29].

Authors and Works Noticed:

English Annual Practice (1954), pp. 418, 421, 422 [para. 9]; 419 [para. 26].

English Supreme Court Practice (1976), vol. 1, p. 310 [para. 11].

Marshall, T. David, The Physician and Canadian Law (2nd Ed. 1979), p. 5 [para. 19].

Williston and Rolls, Law of Practice and Procedure, pp. 731, 782, 783 [para. 10].

Counsel:

Donald A. MacBeath, for the plaintiff;

Bruce Winsor, for the first defendant;

Colm St. Roch Seciour, for the second defendant.

This case was heard before Cummings, D.C.J., of the Newfoundland District Court, who delivered the following judgment on December 14, 1984: