C. Kish

The appellant appealed the trial judge's decision regarding the terms of a financial advance.

The trial judge found that the money was advanced with an obligation to repay on demand only in the event of separation or divorce, a condition that did not arise.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings, noting they were well justified on the evidence and owed significant deference.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The appellant was catastrophically injured in a horseback riding accident while participating in a national youth volunteer program in Alberta.

She sued the program operators, the group leader, and the federal Crown in Ontario.

The trial judge found the defendants breached their duty of care but dismissed the action on the basis that the negligence did not cause the injury.

The trial judge also held that she would have exercised her discretion to extend the applicable Alberta limitation period, which had expired.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

The majority upheld the trial judge's findings on causation, concluding there was no palpable and overriding error.

In a concurring opinion, Laskin J.A. found the trial judge's causation analysis unsatisfactory but agreed the action should be dismissed because it was statute-barred under Alberta law, and the court had no discretion to extend the limitation period following the Supreme Court's decision in Tolofson.