In Charlie v. Canada Safeway Ltd., the British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that there is a single standard of care for occupiers under the Occupiers’ Liability Act. This standard requires that the occupier [defendant] take reasonable care in all the circumstances that a person [the plaintiff] will be reasonably safe in using the premises.
In Charlie, the plaintiff was injured by slipping on exposed water while on the defendant’s premises, a supermarket. The court held that the type of hazard is a relevant factor in determining whether a defendant has exercised reasonable care, but it does not increase or lower the standard of care required of that defendant. Groberman J.A., writing for the court, rejected the argument that there are different standards of care in "due diligence" cases and "unsafe conditions" cases. He held that a water hazard, though difficult to prove, does not require the higher evidentiary standard of certainty, and that the evidence must only establish the presence or absence of water on the balance of probabilities.
The Court upheld the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claim.
April 7, 2011
Link to Decision
Liam Oster
*
No comments:
Post a Comment