The appellant purchased a truck that was destroyed by a fire caused by a manufacturing defect.
The manufacturer and dealer refused to compensate her.
At trial, she was awarded general and exemplary damages under the Saskatchewan Consumer Protection Act.
The Court of Appeal set aside the exemplary damages and awarded costs against the appellant.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, restoring the exemplary damages because the manufacturer's failure to warn consumers of the known defect constituted a 'wilful' violation under s. 65 of the Act.
The Court also set aside the costs award, holding that s. 66 protects consumers from costs awards on appeal unless the action is frivolous or vexatious.
