Nowakowski v. Campbell et al., 2024 ONSC 6848

Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: 2240/18 DATE: 2024-12-09

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

Sarah Nowakowski, Plaintiff

– and –

Katrina Campbell, Allison Malcolm, Shaun Le Brun and Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, Defendants

-- and –

Economical Insurance, added by Order pursuant to s. 258(14) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, as amended, Statutory Third Party

Counsel

Counsel: Johanna Drennan, for the Plaintiff Beau Chapman, for the Defendant, Allstate Insurance Company Allison Malcolm, Self-represented, Observing Mahdi Hussein, for the Defendant Katrina Campbell No one appearing for the Defendant, Shaun Le Brun Cameron Foster and Mark O’Donnell, for the Third Party

HEARD: November 19, 2024

Supplementary Reasons for Decision

TEN CATE, j.

[1] These reasons are supplementary to my Reasons for Decision dated December 5, 2024 (2024 ONSC 6810).

[2] After the release of my reasons, I became aware of a decision called Mazur v. Elias et al., [2005] O.J. No 1407 (C.A.), which was not provided to me by either counsel.

[3] In Mazur the Court of Appeal decided [at para. 12] that it is unnecessary for the purpose of s. 192 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 for one owner to have the consent of the co-owner before liability will attach to both.

[4] I therefore wish to correct paragraph 29 of my Reasons for Decision to delete the last sentence which reads, “As a result, pursuant to s. 192(2) of the Highway Traffic Act, Ms. Malcolm’s consent flowed through Mr. Le Brun to Ms. Campbell”. Pursuant to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur, Ms. Malcolm’s consent was unnecessary since Mr. Le Brun was a co-owner of the vehicle. Liability will therefore attach to both.

[5] My determination in paragraph 30 remains the same.

Justice E. ten Cate Released: December 9, 2024