The appellant was injured while riding as a passenger in a vehicle driven by the respondent, who was impaired by alcohol.
At trial, the jury found that the appellant had impliedly absolved the respondent from liability by willingly assuming the role of passenger while knowing of the impairment, successfully establishing the defence of volenti non fit injuria.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that while the volenti defence is rarely applicable in drunken driver-willing passenger cases, it was open to the jury on the evidence to reach that conclusion.
The Court also found that despite potential confusion in the trial judge's charge regarding the relationship between volenti and contributory negligence, the jury's answers were clear and their verdict was not unreasonable.
