The appellant, a four-year-old child, was injured when she fell from a hotel window after climbing onto a radiator and leaning against the window screen, which gave way.
The trial judge found the hotel liable under articles 1054 and 1055 of the Civil Code, concluding the screen was defective and constituted a trap.
The Court of Appeal reversed this decision.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that article 1054 did not apply as the damage resulted from the action of the person, not the thing itself.
Furthermore, article 1055 did not apply because the screen was intended to keep insects out, not to prevent falls, and was therefore used for a purpose contrary to its intended use.
The Court also found no liability under article 1053, as the situation did not constitute a hidden trap.
