Gilmour v. Mossop

Gilmour v. Mossop

Evidence did not establish that the employer breached a duty of care: the premises and lighting were reasonably safe, there was no proof the employer knowingly permitted a hazardous condition, and the employee had assumed ordinary domestic risks including the presence of household pets; therefore the action failed and the appeal was allowed.

Citation
[1951] SCR 815
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Harold Hannen Gilmour; Respondent (plaintiff): Marion L. Mossop
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 June 1951
Procedural Posture
Tort Negligence (employer/employee) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal allowed; action dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Volenti Non Fit Injuria, Contributory Negligence, Reasonable Safety of Premises
Source Language
English
Labour Law Tort Employer Liability Occupiers' Liability Domestic Employment Negligence Duty of Care Volenti Non Fit Injuria +2 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harold Hannen Gilmour

Appellant (defendant)

Marion L. Mossop

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Tort Negligence (employer/employee) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether employer breached duty of care by permitting dog on stairway
  2. 2 Whether lighting and absence of handrail made premises unsafe
  3. 3 Whether employee assumed the risk of pets in the household (volenti)

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence did not establish that the employer breached a duty of care: the premises and lighting were reasonably safe, there was no proof the employer knowingly permitted a hazardous condition, and the employee had assumed ordinary domestic risks including the presence of household pets; therefore the action failed and the appeal was allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; action dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Action dismissed