Shawinigan Engineering Co. v. Naud

Shawinigan Engineering Co. v. Naud

Expert evidence must be weighed like any other evidence; the Workmen's Compensation Act did not shift the burden of proof to the employer — the claimant must prove accident and causal connection; on the evidence the respondent met that burden and the Court of King's Bench decision awarding compensation is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[1929] SCR 341
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Shawinigan Engineering Company; Respondent/plaintiff: Louis N. Naud
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 March 1929
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Court of King’s Bench (quebec) Under Workmen's Compensation Framework / Final Decision on Appeal by the Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of King's Bench affirmed.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Onus of Proof, Causation, Proof of Accident, Appreciation of Expert Testimony
Source Language
English
Evidence Workmen's Compensation Personal Injury Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Onus of Proof Causation Proof of Accident +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shawinigan Engineering Company

Appellant/defendant

Louis N. Naud

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Court of King’s Bench (quebec) Under Workmen's Compensation Framework / Final Decision on Appeal by the Supreme Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether expert testimony is to be treated differently from ordinary witness evidence
  2. 2 Whether the Workmen's Compensation Act shifts the burden of proof to the employer
  3. 3 Whether the respondent proved causation between the accident and his perigastritis

Ratio Decidendi

Expert evidence must be weighed like any other evidence; the Workmen's Compensation Act did not shift the burden of proof to the employer — the claimant must prove accident and causal connection; on the evidence the respondent met that burden and the Court of King's Bench decision awarding compensation is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of King's Bench affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the Court of King's Bench awarding respondent compensation (capital fixed at $2,687.04) affirmed.