The appellants were involved in a rear-end motor vehicle collision and sued for personal injuries.
At trial, the judge failed to instruct the jury that the evidentiary burden shifts to the defendant in a rear-end collision.
Furthermore, the trial judge permitted the respondents to introduce extensive surveillance evidence that had not been disclosed in an affidavit of documents, leading to a trial by ambush.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, substituted a finding of liability against the respondents, and ordered a new trial on the issue of damages due to the severe prejudice caused by the undisclosed surveillance evidence.