Hai Huang

The plaintiff sued the defendant municipality for injuries sustained after tripping on beach stones scattered on a public sidewalk.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the sidewalk was not in an unreasonable state of non-repair and that it had no knowledge of the stones.

The court granted the defendant's motion, finding that the presence of the stones did not constitute an unreasonable state of non-repair as they could be easily avoided by a person exercising ordinary care.

Furthermore, the court held that the municipality was exempt from liability under s. 44(3)(a) of the Municipal Act because it did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, about the stones on the sidewalk.

The accused, Wendel Attard, was charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm following a collision.

The Crown alleged that Attard's vehicle, travelling at an excessive speed (112-117 km/hr in an 80 km/hr zone), collided with another vehicle making a left turn, demonstrating dangerous driving.

The defence argued that while the driving might have been dangerous, it did not constitute a "marked departure" from the standard of care required for a criminal conviction, noting that other vehicles were also exceeding the speed limit.

The court found Attard's driving objectively dangerous due to speed and inattention, but ultimately concluded that the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that his conduct amounted to a "marked departure" from the standard of care of a reasonable and prudent person.

Consequently, the accused was found not guilty.