Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t! This week, lawyer Kyla Lee discusses the law of causation when it comes to damages that occurred due to negligence.
Acumen Law Corporation lawyer Kyla Lee gives her take on a made-in-Canada court case each week, and discusses why these cases should have been heard by Canada’s highest court: the Supreme Court of Canada.
If property damages occurred, and the reason for the damages is quite obvious once prior negligence had been discovered, is that sufficient to determine the fault?
In law there is a concept called causation, which provides a means of connecting conduct with a resulting effect.
In the case of Robert Gingras, a building that he owned had to be demolished due to a severe rat infestation. The cause of the infestation was quite clearly due to cracks in sewer pipes that the city had neglected to fix. When Mr. Gingras attempted to take action against the city for the damages, the court stated that although the city was in fact negligent, there was no causal connection between that fault and the damages being claimed.
The Supreme Court of Canada had the opportunity here to develop the law of causation on the basis of science and knowledge, however they did not allow the possibility of the causation law to be expanded to include circumstances like this.
See more
vancouvercriminallaw.com/category/video/
Follow Kyla on Twitter
twitter.com/irplawyer
Read more about Kyla
vancouvercriminallaw.com/criminal-lawyers-vancouver-richmond-surrey-victoria/kyla-lee/