Chadwick

The appellants appealed a trial judgment declaring that the testator's wife was the sole beneficiary of his estate.

The will, drafted on a stationer's form, contained ambiguous language granting the wife the estate 'for her use absolutely' but also included a gift over to the testator's nieces and nephews upon her death.

The Divisional Court set aside the trial judgment, finding that the trial judge erred in applying the rule in Re Walker.

Applying the 'armchair rule' from Re Burke, the Court held that the testator's clear intention was to grant his wife a life interest in his half of the estate, with the remainder vesting in his nieces and nephews.

The applicant worker suffered a workplace injury and elected to receive workers' compensation benefits.

He subsequently commenced a civil action in negligence against the hospital, doctors, and college involved in his treatment.

The Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal determined that the action against the hospital and its employees was barred by the Workers' Compensation Act, but the action against the doctor and college could proceed, despite the Board waiving its right of subrogation.

The applicants and the counter-applicant doctor sought judicial review.

The Divisional Court dismissed the applications, finding that the Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether rights of action are taken away, and its decision was not patently unreasonable.

The defendants appealed a trial judgment finding them liable for injuries sustained by a bus passenger when the driver braked suddenly to avoid a cyclist.

The trial judge awarded $22,500 in general damages for chronic back and hip strain, finding the injuries met the threshold under the Insurance Act.

On appeal, the defendants argued the trial judge erred in finding negligence, assessing the medical evidence, and failing to draw an adverse inference from the plaintiff not calling her initial treating physician.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's findings of fact and negligence.

The judgment was varied on consent only to correct a mathematical error in the statutory deductible.