Ghassan Hamod

The applicants, owners of 156 First Avenue in Ottawa, sought a declaration of prescriptive easement over a laneway (the “Disputed Lands”) running between their property and the respondents’ property at 152 First Avenue.

The applicants claimed the right to use the laneway to access the rear of their property and for parking, and sought an order for the removal of a fence erected by the respondents.

The court reviewed extensive affidavit evidence from the parties, former tenants, and neighbours regarding the historical use of the laneway.

The court found that while there was some evidence of past use for parking, the applicants failed to establish 20 years of open, uninterrupted, and acquiesced use necessary for a prescriptive easement, nor that such use was reasonably necessary for the enjoyment of the property.

The application was dismissed.

The appellant, a subway user, was arrested and searched by a police officer after she refused to hold an escalator handrail and declined to identify herself.

The officer, designated as a subway inspector by the transit authority, had been trained that failure to hold the handrail was an offence under a municipal by-law.

The Supreme Court held that the officer committed a civil fault under art. 1457 C.C.Q. because a reasonable police officer would have recognized that the pictogram was merely a safety advisory, not an obligation under the by-law.

The transit authority was found directly liable for providing legally incorrect training and also liable as mandator for the officer's fault.

The victim bore no share of the liability, as she was entitled to refuse to comply with an unlawful order.

Damages of $20,000 were awarded, apportioned equally between the transit authority and the officer.