Volkert v. Diamond Truck Co.

Volkert v. Diamond Truck Co.

The employee's unauthorized, deliberate taking and driving of the truck was an independent intervening cause so that neither art.1054 C.C. nor ss.31 or 53 of the Motor Vehicle Act rendered the owner civilly liable; the statutory presumption of s.53 was rebutted and any statutory breach did not directly cause the appellant's injury.

Citation
[1940] SCR 455
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Ferdinand Volkert; Respondent / Defendant: Diamond Truck Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 April 1940
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of King's Bench affirmed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Breach of Statutory Duty, Causation, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Tort Motor Vehicle Law Civil Liability Statutory Interpretation Negligence Vicarious Liability Breach of Statutory Duty Causation +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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ferdinand Volkert

Appellant / Plaintiff

Diamond Truck Company

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the owner is civilly liable for injuries caused by an employee who took a vehicle without authorization
  2. 2 Whether Civil Code of Quebec art.1054 applies to unauthorized acts of an employee
  3. 3 Whether ss.31 and 53 of the Quebec Motor Vehicle Act impose civil liability on an owner for leaving a vehicle unlocked on a public highway

Ratio Decidendi

The employee's unauthorized, deliberate taking and driving of the truck was an independent intervening cause so that neither art.1054 C.C. nor ss.31 or 53 of the Motor Vehicle Act rendered the owner civilly liable; the statutory presumption of s.53 was rebutted and any statutory breach did not directly cause the appellant's injury.

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, appeal side, Province of Quebec, affirmed.