London Street Railway Co. v. Brown

London Street Railway Co. v. Brown

Because the jury, after a correct charge, found the plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence that was a proximate cause of the injury (the accident would not have occurred but for plaintiff's negligence), the plaintiff was barred from recovery; the Court of Appeal erred in ordering a new trial and the trial judge's judgment for the defendant was restored.

Citation
(1901) 31 SCR 642
Parties
Defendant/appellant: London Street Railway Company; Plaintiff/respondent: Edward C. Brown
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 November 1901
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort — Negligence (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of trial judge restored.
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Jury Findings, Causation, Duty of Care, Appeal and New Trial
Source Language
English
Tort Negligence Civil Procedure Railway/transport Law Contributory Negligence Jury Findings Causation Duty of Care +1 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Street Railway Company

Defendant/appellant

Edward C. Brown

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort — Negligence (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff's contributory negligence barred recovery despite defendants' negligence
  2. 2 Whether jury findings were inconsistent and warranted a new trial
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's charge properly instructed jury on contributory negligence

Ratio Decidendi

Because the jury, after a correct charge, found the plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence that was a proximate cause of the injury (the accident would not have occurred but for plaintiff's negligence), the plaintiff was barred from recovery; the Court of Appeal erred in ordering a new trial and the trial judge's judgment for the defendant was restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of trial judge restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of Chief Justice Meredith restored (verdict for defendant)