How does a jury decide the value of the emotional and physical toll from a medical misdiagnosis? Join us as we explore a poignant case where a woman was mistakenly diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent unnecessary surgery, leading to a $400,000 jury award. We'll unravel the stringent criteria needed to hold a doctor legally accountable and dissect the often-mysterious process by which juries calculate non-pecuniary damages such as pain and suffering. This segment promises to shed light on the profound impact these legal decisions have on both patients and the healthcare system.

Shifting our focus, we then offer a deep dive into a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision involving the rape shield provision. This case, originating from British Columbia, addresses the complex balance between protecting a sexual assault complainant's privacy and ensuring a fair trial. Learn why the Supreme Court upheld a trial judge’s decision to exclude questioning about prior consensual sexual activity in a marital case, and what this means for the admissibility of evidence in sexual assault trials. We also tackle the nuanced debate over publication bans during appeals, exploring how the courts balance transparency with privacy. Don't miss this insightful discussion on two pivotal legal issues shaping the judicial landscape.

Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discssed.