Hanson v. City of Saint John

Hanson v. City of Saint John

Majority held the City negligent for misdesign/miscalculation in improving the slide which created a grave, non-obvious danger at speeds to be anticipated, thus allowing plaintiffs’ appeal against the City; the Association was not liable because its responsible officials lacked actual knowledge of the concealed danger, so the appeal against the Association was dismissed; Bullock order on costs authorized.

Citation
[1974] SCR 354
Parties
Plaintiffs/appellants: John R. Hanson et al.; Defendant/respondent: City of Saint John; Defendant/respondent: Saint John Horticultural Association
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 1973
Procedural Posture
Tort — Occupier's Liability (negligence) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the New Brunswick Court of Appeal; Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: judgment against City of Saint John restored; appeal dismissed as against Saint John Horticultural Association
Legal Topics
Duty to Licensees, Concealed Danger, Assumption of Risk, Concurrent Findings of Fact, Costs (bullock Order)
Source Language
English
Torts Occupier's Liability Negligence Civil Procedure (appeal) Duty to Licensees Concealed Danger Assumption of Risk Concurrent Findings of Fact +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John R. Hanson et al.

Plaintiffs/appellants

City of Saint John

Defendant/respondent

Saint John Horticultural Association

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Tort — Occupier's Liability (negligence) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the New Brunswick Court of Appeal; Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the City was negligent in redesigning/widening the toboggan slide and thus liable for injuries
  2. 2 Whether the Horticultural Association, as occupier, owed a duty to warn licensees of the concealed danger and had actual or imputed knowledge
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs assumed the risk or were contributorily negligent

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held the City negligent for misdesign/miscalculation in improving the slide which created a grave, non-obvious danger at speeds to be anticipated, thus allowing plaintiffs’ appeal against the City; the Association was not liable because its responsible officials lacked actual knowledge of the concealed danger, so the appeal against the Association was dismissed; Bullock order on costs authorized.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: judgment against City of Saint John restored; appeal dismissed as against Saint John Horticultural Association

Orders

  • Judgment entered against City of Saint John for the amounts assessed at trial
  • Appeal dismissed and judgment against Saint John Horticultural Association set aside (Association exonerated)