The Queen v. Jennings et al.

The Queen v. Jennings et al.

The Department was liable under s.33 of the Highway Improvement Act for failing to maintain the stop sign as part of the duty to keep the King's Highway in repair; s.33(3) did not relieve the Crown; the trial apportionment of fault (80% Department, 20% driver) was upheld; the Court of Appeal's increased assessment of total damages to $180,000 was proper and not excessive; the principle of reducing future-earnings damages for anticipated income tax (Gourley) was rejected for Canada.

Citation
[1966] SCR 532
Parties
Defendant Appellant (crown/department of Highways): Her Majesty The Queen in right of the Province of Ontario (Minister of Highways); Plaintiff Respondent (mentally Incompetent; Represented by Committee): Robert Malcolm Jennings; Committee for Plaintiff / Plaintiff Representative: Wilmot Stanley Briggs; Defendant Respondent (driver): Garry Cronsberry
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 April 1966
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort Appeal (personal Injury and Fatal Accidents) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario (on Appeal From Trial Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; Court of Appeal judgment upholding increased damages affirmed.
Legal Topics
Duty to Maintain Highway, Crown Liability Under Statute, Apportionment of Fault, Quantum of Damages, Income Tax on Future Earnings, Loss of Amenities, Stock Option Losses, Fatal Accidents Act Claim
Source Language
English
Torts Transportation Administrative Law Damages Law Taxation Duty to Maintain Highway Crown Liability Under Statute Apportionment of Fault +5 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen in right of the Province of Ontario (Minister of Highways)

Defendant Appellant (crown/department of Highways)

Robert Malcolm Jennings

Plaintiff Respondent (mentally Incompetent; Represented by Committee)

Wilmot Stanley Briggs

Committee for Plaintiff / Plaintiff Representative

Garry Cronsberry

Defendant Respondent (driver)

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort Appeal (personal Injury and Fatal Accidents) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario (on Appeal From Trial Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to maintain a stop sign constituted "default to keep the King's Highway in repair" under s.33 of the Highway Improvement Act
  2. 2 Whether s.33(3) exemption precludes Crown liability for absence/misplacement of traffic sign
  3. 3 Proper apportionment of fault between the Department and the driver

Ratio Decidendi

The Department was liable under s.33 of the Highway Improvement Act for failing to maintain the stop sign as part of the duty to keep the King's Highway in repair; s.33(3) did not relieve the Crown; the trial apportionment of fault (80% Department, 20% driver) was upheld; the Court of Appeal's increased assessment of total damages to $180,000 was proper and not excessive; the principle of reducing future-earnings damages for anticipated income tax (Gourley) was rejected for Canada.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; Court of Appeal judgment upholding increased damages affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs payable to Jennings
  • Cross-appeal of Cronsberry dismissed with costs payable to Jennings