Montreal Light, Heat & Power Co. v. Laurence

Montreal Light, Heat & Power Co. v. Laurence

Because the deceased made a surreptitious unauthorized connection in breach of an express contract term and used wiring not conforming to required standards, the company owed no duty in respect of that installation and therefore was not liable for the death resulting from contact with that wiring; appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Citation
(1907) 39 SCR 326
Parties
Defendant / Appellant: Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company; Plaintiff / Respondent: Marie Louise Laurence
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 October 1907
Procedural Posture
Tort — Negligence (death) Arising From Electric Supply / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (on Verdict of Jury and Judgment of Superior Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; respondent's action dismissed.
Legal Topics
Electricity Supply Liability, Duty of Care, Contributory Negligence, Unauthorized/surreptitious Installations, Breach of Contract
Source Language
English
Negligence Contract Trespass Electricity Supply Liability Duty of Care Contributory Negligence Unauthorized/surreptitious Installations Breach of Contract

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company

Defendant / Appellant

Marie Louise Laurence

Plaintiff / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tort — Negligence (death) Arising From Electric Supply / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (on Verdict of Jury and Judgment of Superior Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the electric company owed a duty to the deceased in respect of wiring unlawfully installed and connected by him
  2. 2 Whether the company's alleged defective transformer made it liable for death when the current passed through a surreptitious unauthorized connection
  3. 3 Whether breach of express contract terms by the consumer (unauthorized connections, non‑compliant wiring) bars recovery

Ratio Decidendi

Because the deceased made a surreptitious unauthorized connection in breach of an express contract term and used wiring not conforming to required standards, the company owed no duty in respect of that installation and therefore was not liable for the death resulting from contact with that wiring; appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; respondent's action dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondent's action dismissed; appellants awarded costs.