2 total
The court found no implied consent for the stolen vehicle but preserved the negligence claims.
This decision addresses whether the owner of a vehicle (Floyd Thomas) provided implied consent to his son (Robert Thomas) to possess and operate the vehicle, which was involved in a serious accident.
The court found that there was no implied consent, based on clear evidence that Robert knew he did not have permission, and that Floyd had a consistent history of restricting access.
The court declined to dismiss the action entirely, as other negligence issues remained for trial.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's motion to set aside the administrative dismissal of her appeal due to extensive, unjustified delays.
The appellant sought to set aside a motion judge's order dismissing her motion to set aside the administrative dismissal of her appeal.
The appeal had been administratively dismissed twice due to the appellant's repeated failure to meet perfection deadlines, despite extensions.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's motion, finding no basis to interfere with the motion judge's discretion, noting the extensive delay, the unconvincing justification for non-perfection, and the lack of proof for the appellant's claims of material tampering or respondent non-cooperation.
