--

Part 2: Unintentional Tort Cases

Case #4: Dodgson v. Topolinsky (1980)

Mr. Justice Labrosse of the Ontario High Court of Justice found driver Carol Dodgson 15% at fault in an accident because of her failure to wear her seatbelt, even though the other driver's negligence was the cause of the accident.

The driver of the other car, Melva Topolinsky, had stopped momentarily at an intersection in a rural area. Then she moved out into the path of Dodgson's car. Dodgson suffered a severe scalp wound and shattered right knee. Her daughter also suffered minor injuries.

Mr. Justice Labrosse awarded the plaintiff $39,184.50 for her injuries, but then reduced this award to $33,306.82 because she was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the accident.

The decision means that a person who does not wear a seatbelt while in a car is negligent in not taking precautions for personal safety. If wearing a seatbelt would have prevented or lessened injuries suffered in an accident, damages will be reduced, even if the accident is totally the fault of the other driver.

Case #5: Campbell v. Royal Bank of Canada (1964)

Campbell, the plaintiff, was a customer at one of the branches of the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) in Manitoba.

Visiting the branch one winter day, she slipped and fell on the floor, and was seriously injured. Between 7-8 cm of snow had fallen during the day, and customers had tracked slush that formed various wet spots into the bank. In particular, a dangerous glaze had formed near the tellers wicket that Campbell went to.

No effort had been made by bank employees to wipe the floor at any time during the day; no mats were provided to customers to wipe their feet. The plaintiff had observed that the floor was wet in certain spots, but was not aware of the dangerous condition at the tellers wicket.

The plaintiff won at trial, but lost when the defendants appealed to the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The plaintiff then appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, who restored the original trial decision.

Questions for Case #4-5:

Question #4: Explain in your own words why the judge in Case #4 decided Dodgson was partly liable for her own injury.

Question #5: What is the legal term discussed in the Tort Video Lecture for a situation where a plaintiff is partly responsible for her own injuries? (Hint: "C____________ N___________")

Question #6: What is the legal term discussed in the Tort Video Lecture for the duty of care that a business has towards visitors? (Hint: "O____________ L___________")

Question #7: In Case #5, was Campbell an invitee, licensee, or trespasser?