The plaintiff was severely injured after falling from a railway trestle on lands owned by Canadian National Railway (CN) while taking a short cut.
The plaintiff sued both CN and the City of Quinte West.
The City brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the action against it.
The plaintiff argued the City was an occupier because it cut the grass on an adjacent parcel of land, and that it owed a duty to prevent access to the railway hazard.
The Superior Court of Justice granted the City's motion, finding that the City was not an occupier of the hazard location and that its maintenance of adjacent lands did not create the danger.
The court further held that the City owed no general duty of care to prevent pedestrians from accessing third-party railway lands.
