business tort law
Fordham v Dutton-Dunwich (Municipality) 2012, ONSC 6739, 2014 ONCA 891
Facts
The plaintiff ran a stop sign at 80 km/h on a rural road and then was unable to negotiate a small S curve just beyond the stop sign. The plaintiff lost control of his vehicle and crashed into a concrete bridge suffering serious personal injuries. There was evidence at trial that the S curve was not properly signed and that rural drivers did not always stop for stop signs in and around these types of areas. There was also expert evidence that if the plaintiff had stopped at the stop sign, then he would have been able to negotiate the S curve.
Superior Court of Justice Decision:
Justice Morissette concluded that the degree of fault ought to be shared equally between the plaintiff and municipality. The plaintiff’s negligence was a causal factor to the extent of 50% because if he had stopped at the stop sign this crash would not have happened. Recognizing that the failure to stop at the stop sign was part of the "ordinary rural" driver’s behavior in this area, Justice Morissette held that if there was warning signs that the hazard was ahead, then the plaintiff likely would not have been injured, even if he had not stopped at the stop sign.
Court of Appeal Decision:
Although the Court of Appeal found some support for the proposition that not all rural drivers in this area stopped for stop signs, Laskin J.A., speaking for the Court, noted that there was no credible evidence that local drivers went through stop signs at the speed limit. More importantly, the Court held that even if there had been such evidence this was legally irrelevant. There is not one standard for city drivers and another standard for rural drivers. A municipality’s duty does not extend to making its roads safe for negligent drivers. A municipality need only erect signs if failing to do so would expose an ordinary driver exercising reasonable care to an unreasonable risk of harm
give summary .
Is it intentional or unintentional tort? How?
Discuss the underlying type of tort in this case.
List the possible remedies for the injured/affected party.
Discuss the duty of care, product and professional liability in the case
Discuss how the risk could be minimized in the case ( 500 words)