From: Steve
Hedley <S.Hedley@ucc.ie>
Sent: Wednesday
2 April 2025 06:37
To: Norman
Siebrasse; obligations
Subject: RE: Covid
duty of care decision from Ontario on Canlii?
The
link has now been restored.
The
claim is not that the distribution of the Covid shot was wrongful - rather it
is a claim for negligent misrepresentation for associated government
information and advice. While there is some (brief) argument that the claim
fails on policy grounds, the main argument is on proximity, that the
information was distributed to everyone and not to a specific group.
There
was also a claim for misfeasance in public office, similarly rejected.
From
press reports, there is an ongoing claim by the same plaintiff against Pfizer,
the manufacturers.
From: Norman Siebrasse <norman.siebrasse@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday 27 March 2025 11:52
To: obligations <obligations@uwo.ca>
Subject: Covid duty of care decision from Ontario on Canlii?
[EXTERNAL] This email was sent from outside of UCC.
In Hartman v. Attorney General of Canada et al., 2025 ONSC 1831 Antoniani J of the Ontario SCJ
dismissed a liability claim by the family of Sean Hartman, an Ontario high
schooler who died weeks after taking a Covid shot, holding that there was no
private law duty of care. The decision was up briefly on Canlii yesterday - I
read about it in Blacklock's,
found it in Canlii and skimmed it, which is all to say I am sure it was really
there. I then sent the link to a colleague with more of an interest in these
matters. A couple of hours later the link was broken and the decision had been
taken down. Did anyone download a copy before it got taken down? The case is
called Hartman v some gov't body., probably the Ontario Dept of Health. (Or if
it is still there and I am just really bad with Canlii, please let me know.)
Norman
--
Norman Siebrasse
Professor of Law
University of New Brunswick
Sufficient Description.com