Ratté v. Provencher

Ratté v. Provencher

The appellate court must defer to the trial judge's assessment of credibility, weighing of circumstantial evidence and accepted expert reconstruction unless that conclusion is one no reasonable person could reach; on the balance of probabilities the trial judge reasonably found defendant negligent, so the Court of Appeal erred in reversing.

Citation
[1964] SCR 606
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Dame Therese Ratté; Defendant/respondent: Théodore Provencher
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 June 1964
Procedural Posture
Motor Vehicle Tort (wrongful Death) / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court restored.
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof — Preponderance of Probabilities, Credibility of Witnesses, Expert Evidence, Appellate Deference to Trial Findings
Source Language
English
Torts Motor Vehicle Law Evidence Civil Procedure Appellate Review Burden of Proof Standard of Proof — Preponderance of Probabilities Credibility of Witnesses +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dame Therese Ratté

Plaintiff/appellant

Théodore Provencher

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Motor Vehicle Tort (wrongful Death) / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff discharged the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's factual findings based on witness credibility and expert evidence should be reversed by an appellate court
  3. 3 What standard of appellate review applies to findings of fact based on credibility and inferences

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court must defer to the trial judge's assessment of credibility, weighing of circumstantial evidence and accepted expert reconstruction unless that conclusion is one no reasonable person could reach; on the balance of probabilities the trial judge reasonably found defendant negligent, so the Court of Appeal erred in reversing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Judgment of Lizotte J. in favour of plaintiff restored.