Western Canada Power Co. v. Velasky

Western Canada Power Co. v. Velasky

The accident was caused by the contractor's failure to perform the undertaking to secure the poles; the respondent was the contractor's employee, not the defendants' servant, and the defendants therefore were not liable as occupiers for the contractor's sole negligence.

Citation
(1914) 49 SCR 423
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Western Canada Power Co.; Respondent / Plaintiff: Peter Velasky
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 February 1914
Procedural Posture
Tort Negligence / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for plaintiff reversed and action dismissed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Independent Contractor Vs. Employer Liability, Duty of Occupier to Invitees, Assumption of Risk by Contractor's Employees
Source Language
English
Torts Occupiers' Liability Contractor Liability Employment Law Negligence Independent Contractor Vs. Employer Liability Duty of Occupier to Invitees Assumption of Risk by Contractor's Employees

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Western Canada Power Co.

Appellant / Defendant

Peter Velasky

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Tort Negligence / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the occupier (owner) was liable for injury to an employee of an independent contractor
  2. 2 Whether master and servant relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant
  3. 3 Whether the occupier invited the worker onto premises in a way that imposed a duty to make premises safe

Ratio Decidendi

The accident was caused by the contractor's failure to perform the undertaking to secure the poles; the respondent was the contractor's employee, not the defendants' servant, and the defendants therefore were not liable as occupiers for the contractor's sole negligence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for plaintiff reversed and action dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs of this court and of the courts below
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal and trial judgment awarding $3,200 to plaintiff reversed