Kingston (City) v. Drennan

Kingston (City) v. Drennan

Where accumulated snow and ice at a street crossing produced an unusually steep, polished incline that made passage unreasonably dangerous, and the condition was remediable and known or knowable to municipal authorities, the municipality breached its statutory duty to keep the way in repair; the jury was entitled to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(1897) 27 SCR 46
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Corporation of the City of Kingston; Respondent / Plaintiff: Jennie C. Drennan
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 1897
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (municipal Negligence) / On Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (majority); judgment for plaintiff affirmed; one dissent (Gwynne J.)
Legal Topics
Snow and Ice Liability, Gross Negligence, Notice of Action, Sidewalks and Crossings, Municipal Duty to Repair
Source Language
english
Municipal Law Tort Negligence Statutory Interpretation Snow and Ice Liability Gross Negligence Notice of Action Sidewalks and Crossings +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Corporation of the City of Kingston

Appellant / Defendant

Jennie C. Drennan

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (municipal Negligence) / On Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a street crossing constitutes a sidewalk under the statute
  2. 2 Whether the municipality breached its statutory duty to keep streets and sidewalks in repair
  3. 3 Whether the evidence supported a finding of "gross negligence" by the municipality

Ratio Decidendi

Where accumulated snow and ice at a street crossing produced an unusually steep, polished incline that made passage unreasonably dangerous, and the condition was remediable and known or knowable to municipal authorities, the municipality breached its statutory duty to keep the way in repair; the jury was entitled to find that breach amounted to 'gross negligence' and the trial judge properly exercised his discretion to excuse statutory notice where defendants were not prejudiced.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (majority); judgment for plaintiff affirmed; one dissent (Gwynne J.)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment for plaintiff for 1500.0 affirmed