![]() |
|
|
|
|
Black Sutherland operates with a simple objective: To provide clients with excellent, timely and cost-effective legal advice. Located in the heart of downtown Toronto, Black Sutherland serves a broad base of clients, principally in Ontario, while maintaining worldwide professional relationships through its membership in... [ read more ] Speak to a LawyerTEL: +1 416 361 1500 | FAX: +1 416 361 1674 |
July 28, 2008 | Recent Decision: Patrick J. MonaghanOur firm was successful in defending and limiting, before a jury trial and on appeal, the liability of the owner of "Buddy" the dog. The plaintiff was the driver of a vehicle who lost control after colliding with "Buddy", causing severe injuries. The dog owner was defended under the general liability provisions of his property insurance policy. At trial, there was conflicting evidence from witnesses on whether "Buddy" the dog had a propensity to chase cars. There was also evidence at trial that "Buddy" was well behaved and, when he crossed the road, he looked both ways. In dismissing the plaintiff's appeal against the jury's finding that the driver was 65% contributorily negligent, the Court of Appeal confirmed the law that children's evidence is not inherently more or less reliable than adult's evidence and that a jury's decision on apportionment of damages can only be disturbed in exceptional circumstances. Jones v. Niklaus, 2008 ONCA 504 (June 24, 2008) An article in the Canadian Underwriter about this decision is below: |