Graeme Mew

The moving defendants sought a determination that the substantive law governing liability for a skiing accident occurring in Colorado should be the law of Colorado rather than Ontario.

The plaintiff argued that Ontario law should apply because the parties’ relationship, contractual documents, and supervisory duties arose in Ontario.

Applying the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Tolofson v. Jensen, the court held that the lex loci delicti rule governs tort claims and that the substantive law of the place where the tort occurred generally applies.

The court found no exceptional circumstances warranting departure from that rule despite the parties’ Ontario connections.

The liability issues, including negligence, standard of care, causation, and contributory negligence, were therefore to be determined under Colorado law.

In a personal injury action, the defendants requested the plaintiff attend a defence medical examination with a neuropsychologist.

The plaintiff agreed on the condition that the neuropsychologist's raw test data be produced directly to plaintiff's counsel.

The neuropsychologist refused, citing professional guidelines prohibiting disclosure to non-psychologists.

The court held that at the discovery stage, the raw test data should only be exchanged between neuropsychologists to balance the need for disclosure with the integrity of the testing process.

However, to ensure trial fairness and avoid delays, the court ordered that the raw test data must be produced directly to plaintiff's counsel once the matter reaches the pre-trial stage, subject to strict confidentiality and destruction requirements.