Paskivski v. Canadian Pacific Ltd.

Paskivski v. Canadian Pacific Ltd.

Majority held that while railway duties are generally confined to statutory obligations, the cumulative facts here amounted to special or exceptional circumstances (sole community access, regular predictable use by schoolchildren at the time of switching, absence of barriers or flagmen, icy/windy conditions, long slowly moving train attractive to children) creating a foreseeable risk; Canadian Pacific failed to take reasonable additional precautions and was negligent; trial judgment awarding damages was restored; cross-appeal on costs dismissed.

Citation
[1976] 1 SCR 687
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Steve Paskivski; Plaintiff/appellant: Nick Paskivski (infant suing by next friend Steve Paskivski); Third Party/appellant: Mrs. Steve Paskivski; Defendant/respondent; Appellant by Cross Appeal: Canadian Pacific Limited (formerly Canadian Pacific Railway Company); Defendant/respondent: Wilfred Cook; Defendant/respondent: Charles Marsden; Defendant/respondent: William Pederson; Defendant/respondent: Nestor Stanko
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 April 1975
Procedural Posture
Tort Negligence (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (with Cross Appeal); Judgment on Appeal (april 22, 1975)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; trial judgment restored; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Level Crossing, Duty of Care, Statutory Obligations Vs Common Law, Special/exceptional Circumstances Doctrine, Allurement, Contributory Negligence, Parental Liability, Damages
Source Language
English
Torts Negligence Railway Law Public Safety Level Crossing Duty of Care Statutory Obligations Vs Common Law Special/exceptional Circumstances Doctrine +4 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steve Paskivski

Plaintiff/appellant

Nick Paskivski (infant suing by next friend Steve Paskivski)

Plaintiff/appellant

Mrs. Steve Paskivski

Third Party/appellant

Canadian Pacific Limited (formerly Canadian Pacific Railway Company)

Defendant/respondent; Appellant by Cross Appeal

Wilfred Cook

Defendant/respondent

Charles Marsden

Defendant/respondent

William Pederson

Defendant/respondent

Nestor Stanko

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Tort Negligence (personal Injury) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (with Cross Appeal); Judgment on Appeal (april 22, 1975)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a railway's common law duty of care is limited to statutory/regulatory obligations or extends where special/exceptional circumstances exist
  2. 2 Whether the facts constituted special or exceptional circumstances requiring additional precautions
  3. 3 Whether the railway breached any such duty

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that while railway duties are generally confined to statutory obligations, the cumulative facts here amounted to special or exceptional circumstances (sole community access, regular predictable use by schoolchildren at the time of switching, absence of barriers or flagmen, icy/windy conditions, long slowly moving train attractive to children) creating a foreseeable risk; Canadian Pacific failed to take reasonable additional precautions and was negligent; trial judgment awarding damages was restored; cross-appeal on costs dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; trial judgment restored; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Trial judgment restored and affirmed (award of general damages $85,000 and special damages $4,837.10)
  • Appeal allowed with costs in all Courts