Montreal Light, Heat & Power Co. v. Attorney-General of Quebec

Montreal Light, Heat & Power Co. v. Attorney-General of Quebec

The appellants' construction and operations (including creation of a reservoir and blasting down a natural reef) altered the river's natural conditions, increased ice accumulation and removed a natural barrier, and were the proximate cause of the bridge's partial demolition by ice; therefore appellants are liable despite having taken some precautions and despite unusually severe winter conditions.

Citation
(1908) 41 SCR 116
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company and Others; Respondent/plaintiff: Attorney‑General of the Province of Quebec
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 October 1908
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (damages for Destruction of Public Bridge; Tort/liability for River Works) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (cross‑appeal Filed)
Outcome
Appeal and cross‑appeal dismissed with costs; liability of appellants for destruction of the Yule bridge affirmed; matter of quantum to be ascertained as ordered by the Court of King's Bench.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Riparian Rights, Nuisance, Vis Major, Damages Assessment, Alteration of Natural Conditions
Source Language
English
Maritime Law Tort Property Law Public Works Liability Negligence Riparian Rights Nuisance Vis Major +2 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company and Others

Appellant/defendant

Attorney‑General of the Province of Quebec

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (damages for Destruction of Public Bridge; Tort/liability for River Works) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (cross‑appeal Filed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants who constructed dams and altered riverbed are liable for destruction of a public bridge by ice generated in the reservoir they created
  2. 2 Whether taking foreseeable precautions (raising/strengthening bridge) absolves defendants of liability
  3. 3 Whether extraordinary climatic conditions (severe winter) constitute vis major excusing liability

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants' construction and operations (including creation of a reservoir and blasting down a natural reef) altered the river's natural conditions, increased ice accumulation and removed a natural barrier, and were the proximate cause of the bridge's partial demolition by ice; therefore appellants are liable despite having taken some precautions and despite unusually severe winter conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross‑appeal dismissed with costs; liability of appellants for destruction of the Yule bridge affirmed; matter of quantum to be ascertained as ordered by the Court of King's Bench.

Orders

  • Liability of Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company and Others for damage to Yule bridge affirmed.
  • Assessment of quantum of damages to be referred to and determined by experts as ordered by the Court of King's Bench.