Haase v. Pedro

Haase v. Pedro

The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeal majority that the jury's finding of contributory negligence on the part of the respondent was not reasonably warranted by the evidence; therefore the appellate court's setting aside of the trial verdict was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[1971] SCR 669
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: Norbert Helmut Haase; Defendant Respondent: Armando Pedro
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 1971
Procedural Posture
Tort Motor Vehicle Collision (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Jury Verdict Review, Apportionment of Liability, Standard of Appellate Review
Source Language
English
Motor Vehicles Tort Negligence Civil Procedure Appeal Contributory Negligence Jury Verdict Review Apportionment of Liability +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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norbert Helmut Haase

Plaintiff Appellant

Armando Pedro

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tort Motor Vehicle Collision (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury's apportionment of fault was reasonably warranted by the evidence
  2. 2 Whether an appellate court may set aside a jury verdict under the standard articulated in McCannell v. McLean

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeal majority that the jury's finding of contributory negligence on the part of the respondent was not reasonably warranted by the evidence; therefore the appellate court's setting aside of the trial verdict was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs