Purolator Courier v. Cornwall Gravel
- Citation
- [1980] 2 SCR 118
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 4 June 1980
- Posture
- Appeal Carriage of Goods (carrier Liability) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment Delivered
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 4 June 1980
- Posture
- Appeal Carriage of Goods (carrier Liability) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment Delivered
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Supreme Court held there was no error in the courts below: the carrier remained liable for the damages claimed for delay and the attempted limitation did not justify overturning the judgment; appeal dismissed.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Holland J. and the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Judgment of Holland J. and the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed
02
Material facts
Parties
Purolator Courier Ltd.
Defendant/appellant Counsel: C.R. Thomson, Q.C.; Donald ShortBernard Levert
Defendant/appellant Counsel: C.R. Thomson, Q.C.; Donald ShortRhéal Boisvenue
Defendant/appellant Counsel: C.R. Thomson, Q.C.; Donald ShortCornwall Gravel Company Limited
Plaintiff/respondent Counsel: P.D. Rasmussen; A.H.A. Keenleyside03
Procedural history
Posture
Appeal Carriage of Goods (carrier Liability) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment Delivered
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether carrier is liable for damages caused by delay in carriage of goods
- 02
Whether statutory or contractual limitation of liability excludes recovery for delay damages
- 03
Whether the courts below erred in law or principle in holding the carrier liable
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellants argued the courts below erred and that liability or damages for the loss were limited or excluded by applicable statutory or contractual provisions, so the judgment should be overturned.
- Respondent
- Respondent argued the carrier remained liable for damages caused by delay and that limitation provisions did not bar recovery in the circumstances; the courts below correctly applied law and fact.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Public Commercial Vehicles Act, R.S.O. 1970, c. 375, Sch. A
A carrier of goods may be held liable for loss or damage caused by delay in delivery.
- 02
Supreme Court of Canada appellate principles
An appellate court will not disturb findings of fact or conclusions of law below absent demonstrated error.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Supreme Court held there was no error in the courts below: the carrier remained liable for the damages claimed for delay and the attempted limitation did not justify overturning the judgment; appeal dismissed.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Holland J. and the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Judgment of Holland J. and the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 4 June 1980
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 4 June 1980
Purolator Courier v. Cornwall Gravel Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1980-06-04 Report [1980] 2 SCR 118 Judges Laskin, Bora; Martland, Ronald; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Lamer, Antonio On appeal from Ontario Subjects Transportation Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Purolator Courier v. Cornwall Gravel, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 118 Date: 1980-06-04 Purolator Courier Ltd., Bernard Levert and Rhéal Boisvenue (Defendants) Appellants; and Cornwall Gravel Company Limited (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1980: June 4. Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Dickson, Beetz and Lamer JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO. Carriage of goods—Carrier’s liability—Limitation of liability for loss, damage or injury—Damage caused by delay—Extent of damages recoverable—The Public Commercial Vehicles Act, R.S.O. 1970, c. 375, Sch. A. APPEAL from an order of the Court of Appeal for Ontario dated April 11, 1979, dismissing the appeal of Purolator Courier Ltd. from the judgment of Holland J.[1] Appeal dismissed. C.R. Thomson, Q.C., and Donald Short, for the defendant, appellant. P.D. Rasmussen and A.H.A. Keenleyside, for the plaintiff, respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We do not need to hear you, Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. Keenleyside. We are not persuaded that there was any error in the disposition made by the Courts below. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the defendant, appellant: Campbell, Godfrey & Lewtas, Toronto. Solicitors for the plaintiff, respondent: Hewitt, Hewitt, Nesbitt, Reid, McDonald & Tierney, Ottawa. [1] (1978), 18 O.R. (2d) 551, 83 D.L.R. (3d) 267.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.