Melnychuk v. Ronaghan et al., (1999) 237 A.R. 110 (CA)

• Judge: McClung, Irving and O'Leary, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: April 08, 1999
• Citations: (1999), 237 A.R. 110 (CA)

Melnychuk v. Ronaghan (1999), 237 A.R. 110 (CA);

    197 W.A.C. 110

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] A.R. TBEd. JN.038

Taras Melnychuk (plaintiff/respondent) v. Don Ronaghan, Don Ronaghan carrying on business under the firm name and style of St. Paul Veterinary Clinic and St. Paul Veterinary Clinic a division of Lac Sante Farms Ltd. and Lac Sante Farms Ltd. (defendants/appellants)

(Docket: 9803-0157-AC)

Indexed As: Melnychuk v. Ronaghan et al.

Alberta Court of Appeal

McClung, Irving and O'Leary, JJ.A.

June 3, 1999.

Summary:

A veterinarian performed a caesarean section operation on a heifer. The heifer's owner was injured while assisting the veter­inarian. The owner sued the veterinarian for damages in negligence.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 224 A.R. 221, allowed the action and awarded the owner $325,500 damages. The veterinarian appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the action.

Professional Occupations - Topic 2661

Veterinary surgeons - Liability of practi­tioners - Negligence - A farmer retained a veterinarian to extract a large dead calf from a young heifer - The veterinarian had to perform a caesarean section - The farmer assisted and acted under the veter­inarian's instructions - During part of the procedure, the veterinarian held the scalpel crossway in his mouth - The scalpel pen­etrated the farmer's right hand leaving him permanently disabled - The veterinarian had not explained the steps in the pro­ce­dure nor warned the farmer as to any risks, nor to take any precautions - The farmer sued the veterinarian for damages in negli­gence - In dismissing the action, the Alberta Court of Appeal stated that "[t]here is no duty to warn of a risk that is so obvious and apparent that any reason­able individual would have full knowledge and appreciation of it" - See paragraph 15.

Professional Occupations - Topic 2662

Veterinary surgeons - Liability of practi­tioners - Negligence - Standard of care - [See Professional Occupations - Topic 2661 ].

Torts - Topic 16

Negligence - Standard of care - Where special skill or competence required - [See Professional Occupations - Topic 2661 ].

Cases Noticed:

Donoghue (McAlister) v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 16].

Hollis v. Dow Corning Corp., [1995] 4 S.C.R. 634; 190 N.R. 241; 67 B.C.A.C. 1; 111 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 16].

London Graving Dock Co. v. Horton, [1951] A.C. 737 (H.L.), consd. [para. 17].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Prosser, W.L., Prosser's Handbook on the Law of Torts (4th Ed. 1971), p. 649 [para. 15].

Counsel:

B.D. Baltimore and R.M. Curtis, for the plaintiff/respondent;

W.L. Blenkendorf, Q.C., and T.L. Blenk­endorf, for the defendants/appellants.

This appeal was heard on April 8, 1999, by McClung, Irving and O'Leary, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The court filed the following memorandum of judgment in Edmonton, Alberta, on June 3, 1999.