Pacific Stages Ltd. v. Jones

Pacific Stages Ltd. v. Jones

There was insufficient evidence that the driver knew or ought to have known of the abnormal icy condition; the hazard was unexpected and unobservable until braking, so negligence could not be reasonably inferred and the defence of inevitable accident defeated liability; appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Citation
[1928] SCR 92
Parties
Appellant; Defendant: Pacific Stages Limited; Respondent; Plaintiff: Henry H. Jones
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 October 1927
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (negligence/personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; action dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Inevitable Accident, Standard of Care for Drivers, Foreseeability of Road Conditions, Evidence and Findings of Fact
Source Language
English

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pacific Stages Limited

Appellant; Defendant

Henry H. Jones

Respondent; Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (negligence/personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

  1. 1 Whether the driver knew or ought to have known the icy condition of the pavement
  2. 2 Whether the driver's conduct amounted to negligence given visibility, grade and traffic
  3. 3 Whether the defence of inevitable accident applies

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence that the driver knew or ought to have known of the abnormal icy condition; the hazard was unexpected and unobservable until braking, so negligence could not be reasonably inferred and the defence of inevitable accident defeated liability; appeal allowed and action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; action dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs here and in the Court of Appeal
  • Action dismissed with costs