Foster v. Toronto (City)

Foster v. Toronto (City)

The appeal was dismissed because the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the City; the shelters were independently operated and managed and the City was not directly, indirectly or vicariously responsible for the shelter staff, making summary judgment appropriate.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2015 ONCA 620
Parties
Appellant: Lori Lee Foster; Respondent: City of Toronto
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Summary Judgment, Limitation Period, Administration of Social Housing
Source Language
en
Civil Litigation Municipal Liability Housing Law Vicarious Liability Summary Judgment Limitation Period Administration of Social Housing

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lori Lee Foster

Appellant

City of Toronto

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff disclosed a reasonable cause of action against the City
  2. 2 Whether the City was directly, indirectly or vicariously responsible for shelter staff
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the City; the shelters were independently operated and managed and the City was not directly, indirectly or vicariously responsible for the shelter staff, making summary judgment appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • No costs order