Sparks et al. v. Thompson

Sparks et al. v. Thompson

Appeal allowed: the Appeal Division erred in varying the trial judge's apportionment and damage award because it did not demonstrate the strong and exceptional circumstances required to displace the trial judge's factual findings; therefore the trial judgment apportioning fault 25% to appellants and 75% to respondent and awarding general damages of $41,000 for Fairfax is restored.

Citation
[1975] 1 SCR 618
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Earnest Sparks; Plaintiff/appellant: Ernest Fairfax; Defendant/respondent: Joseph C. Thompson
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 February 1974
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Motor Vehicle Negligence / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; trial judgment restored
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Fault, Assessment of Damages, Appellate Review of Factual Findings, Impaired Driving
Source Language
English
Tort Motor Vehicle Law Negligence Appeal Contributory Negligence Apportionment of Fault Assessment of Damages Appellate Review of Factual Findings +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Earnest Sparks

Plaintiff/appellant

Ernest Fairfax

Plaintiff/appellant

Joseph C. Thompson

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Motor Vehicle Negligence / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellate court may vary trial judge's apportionment of negligence absent strong and exceptional circumstances
  2. 2 Whether appellants were negligent in parking with vehicles encroaching on highway
  3. 3 Whether respondent's impairment and failure to keep proper lookout constituted primary negligence

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal allowed: the Appeal Division erred in varying the trial judge's apportionment and damage award because it did not demonstrate the strong and exceptional circumstances required to displace the trial judge's factual findings; therefore the trial judgment apportioning fault 25% to appellants and 75% to respondent and awarding general damages of $41,000 for Fairfax is restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; trial judgment restored

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of trial judge (Dubinsky J.) restored: apportionment of fault — appellants 25%, respondent 75%