Zambon Company Ltd. v. Schrijvershof, Sr. / Zambon Company Ltd. v. Sicotte et al.

Zambon Company Ltd. v. Schrijvershof, Sr. / Zambon Company Ltd. v. Sicotte et al.

Where an employer instructs an employee to use the employer's vehicle to go for a meal and to return immediately to continue urgent work, the employee is acting in the performance of his employment under art. 1054 and the employer is vicariously liable for negligence of the employee unless the employee converted the vehicle to exclusive personal use; here no such conversion occurred, so the employer is liable.

Citation
[1961] SCR 291
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Zambon Company Limited; Defendant / Mis En Cause: John Zambon; Plaintiff / Respondent: Georgette Sicotte; Plaintiff / Respondent: Adrianus Schrijvershof, Sr.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 February 1961
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec; Determination on Merits (liability)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Employer Liability, Scope of Employment, Negligence, Civil Code Art. 1054
Source Language
English
Tort Labour Law Civil Liability Motor Vehicle Law Vicarious Liability Employer Liability Scope of Employment Negligence +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zambon Company Limited

Appellant / Defendant

John Zambon

Defendant / Mis En Cause

Georgette Sicotte

Plaintiff / Respondent

Adrianus Schrijvershof, Sr.

Plaintiff / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec; Determination on Merits (liability)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether employee was acting in the performance of his employment when using employer's motor vehicle to go for supper and return to complete urgent work
  2. 2 Whether employer is vicariously liable for negligent driving by employee under Civil Code art. 1054
  3. 3 Whether employee converted use of employer's vehicle to exclusive personal use before the accident

Ratio Decidendi

Where an employer instructs an employee to use the employer's vehicle to go for a meal and to return immediately to continue urgent work, the employee is acting in the performance of his employment under art. 1054 and the employer is vicariously liable for negligence of the employee unless the employee converted the vehicle to exclusive personal use; here no such conversion occurred, so the employer is liable.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed with costs.
  • Zambon Company Limited and John Zambon held jointly and severally liable to pay Georgette Sicotte damages in the amount of 2390.58 CAD (two-thirds of her damages).