2 total
An inmate sues the Crown for negligence after slipping and falling at a federal correctional facility.
The plaintiff, an inmate at Bath Institution, brought an action against the Attorney General of Canada after slipping and falling on prison premises.
The defendant admitted it owed a duty of care under the Occupiers' Liability Act and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the parties agreed on the quantum of damages.
The trial proceeded solely on the issues of liability and contributory negligence.
The court heard testimony from several witnesses regarding the condition of the area, the cause of the fall, and the prison's inspection and maintenance systems.
The Court of Appeal set aside a trial judgment for oppression and ordered a new trial due to legally insufficient reasons and procedural unfairness.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario heard an appeal and cross-appeal concerning a trial judge's decision on fraudulent conveyance and oppression claims.
The trial judge had found oppression but did not rule on fraudulent conveyance, basing the oppression finding on a theory not pleaded or argued.
The Court of Appeal found the trial judge's reasons legally insufficient, internally inconsistent, and procedurally unfair, as the decision was based on an unpleaded "reasonable expectation" of a reserve fund.
The court determined it could not conduct a de novo analysis or substitute findings due to credibility issues and the record not inevitably yielding a particular outcome.
Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the trial judgment set aside, and the matter remitted for a new trial.
