TORT LAW
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
UBC’s Point Grey Campus is located on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the xwməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam) people. The land it is situated on has always been a place of learning for the Musqueam people, each generation having passed on their culture, history, and traditions on this site.
COURSE AND CONTACT INFORMATION
| Course Title | Course Code | Term | Credit Value | Teaching Times & Rooms | |
| Tort Law | LAW 241.002 | 2025-26 | 5 | Fall: Wed & Fri, 9:30 – 10:30 am Room 122 Spring: Wed & Fri, 9:30 – 11:00 am Room 122 | |
| Course Instructor | Email Address | Office Location | Office Hours | ||
| Jon Festinger, K.C. | festinger@allard.ubc.ca | Room 457 | Wednesdays, 1:00 – 4:00 pm | ||
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The law of Torts, or civil wrongs, deals with disputes between individuals that arise when the acts or omissions of one person cause injury or property loss, apart from breach of contract or unjust enrichment. The first half of the course deals with intentional harms to the person, property, or personal dignity of another. The second half of the course focuses on the law of negligence, or unintentional injury to another. Analysis of Tort Law involves consideration of social values, deterrence, loss distribution and economic efficiency, as well as corporate and governmental responsibility.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
- Understand and assess different theories, approaches, and goals of tort law.
- Convey the basic principles and rules which govern liability in tort law.
- Understand the historical development of tort law and the social, economic, and ideological context in which it has developed and continues to operate.
- Identify legal issues in torts problems and work with substantive law and policy considerations to resolve them.
MATERIALS
Required casebook: S. Beswick (ed), Tort Law: Cases and Commentaries (CanLII, 2025 edition), available at https://www.canlii.org/en/commentary/doc/2021CanLIIDocs1859 (There have been major content updates so best not to rely on last year’s edition.) It is intended that edited printed bound copies will be available for purchase (at cost price) and collected from the UBC Bookstore during the third week of classes. Be sure to get the .002 “Curtis” class stream version.
Additional readings: Any additional weekly readings outlined in the Syllabus which are not included in the Beswick casebook will be linked to in this Syllabus or otherwise posted on the course website https://torts2.allard.ubc.ca/.
TEACHING METHODS & EXPECTATIONS
Expectations
Attendance and timeliness: Students are expected to attend all classes in-person and arrive on-time. I will aim to ensure class ends at the scheduled time. If you are unable to attend class, lecture captures of the classes will be available on through the course website.
Preparation: It is expected that you will have completed all assigned readings ahead of class. Lectures will be prepared based on this assumption. You will get more out of lectures and any in-class activities if you have done the readings in advance.
Communication: Students are encouraged to ask questions about the course content during class time. On occasion your question may requires a more substantive discussion than the allocated time allows, I may ask that you come discuss the question during my office hours. Students are also welcome to use the course website to raise issues and engage in discussions about legal issues in our area of study. I will also monitor the website and provide comments where relevant.
Health and wellbeing: The transition to Law School is incredibly difficult for many. If you or someone you know is struggling, there are a wealth of Student Wellbeing services at Allard, which you can learn about here – https://allard.ubc.ca/student-portal/student-wellbeing.
SCHEDULE OF TOPICS AND READINGS
The Schedule of Topics and Readings is attached as an appendix to this syllabus and posted on the course website.
While we will stick to the order outlined, the dates we will discuss each topic are an estimate only and may change depending upon the pace of our class. The syllabus and readings are subject to revision and change throughout the year at the discretion of the professor.
EVALUATION
Your Torts mark will be based on the examinations in December and April. The December exam is “help not hurt”, meaning that it will only count toward your final grade if you achieve a higher grade on the December exam than on your final exam. If your December exam grade is higher than your April exam grade, it will count for 25% of your final grade for the course. For example, if you achieve a grade of 75% on your December exam and 73% on your April exam, your final grade will be 73.5%. If you achieve a grade of 73% on your December exam and 75% on your final exam, your final grade will be 75%.
The average mark for the class in the April exam must be between 70% and 75%, so “raw” marks may have to be adjusted to comply. The Examination & Grading Rules are posted on the Allard Law website. Exam marking will be informed by the Grading and Mark Distribution Guidelines.
Some past exams a can be found in the Allard Law exam bank. These previous exams are an invaluable study tool, and I highly recommend you review them and complete practice examinations in preparation for the December and April exams. Bear in mind, however, that instructors teach different cases in each section and each semester, so some previous exams may not be entirely relevant to the materials being taught this term.
AUDIO/VIDEO RECORDING POLICY
Students are permitted to record video or audio of classes, though with the availability of lecture capture there wouldn’t seem to be much gained. Office hours, which are optional, cannot be recorded without the instructor’s prior consent.
GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY
Use of these tools is considered an unauthorized means to complete examinations and would be considered academic misconduct.
UNIVERSITY POLICIES
Academic Integrity
All UBC law students are subject to the University’s rules on Academic Misconduct and are expected to act with academic integrity at all times.
Students should be especially aware of the University’s rules in relation to academic offence of plagiarism. Plagiarism includes: copying the work of another student; copying or paraphrasing from a textbook or reference book, journal article, case or electronic source without proper footnoting; copying your own work that has already been submitted for another course without the express permission of both instructor’s; and, passing off the ideas of another person as your own. If you plagiarize, you will be subject to penalties set out in the UBC calendar.
Academic honesty is an essential requirement in an institution of higher learning. Academic misconduct may have serious implications not only for your education, but also for your future career in law. Students are encouraged to consult the University’s Resources Guide on Academic Integrity.
To learn more about academic misconduct, visit the UBC Library’s website on Academic Integrity. Examples of academic misconduct can also be found in the UBC Annual Report on Student Discipline.
Attendance
Regular attendance in person is expected of students in all classes.
Student Support
UBC provides resources to support student learning and to maintain healthy lifestyles but recognizes that sometimes crises arise and so there are additional resources to access including those for survivors of sexual violence. UBC values respect for the person and ideas of all members of the academic community. Harassment and discrimination are not tolerated nor is suppression of academic freedom. UBC provides appropriate accommodation for students with disabilities and for religious observances. UBC values academic honesty and students are expected to acknowledge the ideas generated by others and to uphold the highest academic standards in all of their actions.
Details of the policies and how to access support are available on the UBC Senate website. Students can also be supported by UBC’s Early Alert service.
COPYRIGHT
Unless otherwise specified, both the course website and the materials provided through it and Professor Beswick’s materials are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Schedule of Topics and Readings
Term 1 (Fall)
Week 1.1 – Sept 3 – Introduction to the Course
No assigned readings.
Week 1.2 – Sept 5 – Legal Reasoning & Challenges
Watch or listen to appellant argument before the Supreme Court in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia (Feb. 25) From start to 1:04:00 at https://www.scc-csc.ca/cases-dossiers/search-recherche/41061/ (video) or https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/kuldeep-kaur-ahluwalia-v-amrit-pal-singh-ahluwalia/id1592442126?i=1000696442915 (Apple podcast)
Legal Argument Generator (Festinger/Harris) – will be presented in class and subsequently posted to the course website.
Week 2.1 – Sept 10 – Understanding Tort Law
§1.3.3: Letang v Cooper, [1964] EWCA Civ 5
§1.2: Overview of tort law
§1.2.1: Sources, reasoning and interpretation
§1.2.2: Basic features
§1.3: Pleading in tort
§1.3.1: The modern law of tort
Week 2.2 – Sept 12 – Trespass to the Person
§2: Trespass to the Person
§2.1: Foundational concepts: volition, directness, intention, capacity
§2.1.1: Smith v Stone, (1647) Style 65, 82 ER 533 (KB)
§2.1.2: Scott v Shepherd, [1773] All ER Rep 295 (KB)
§2.1.3: Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyd’s of London v Scalera, 2000 SCC 24
§2.1.4: Olsen v Olsen, 2006 BCSC 560
Week 3 – Sept 17/19 – Battery
§2.2: Battery
§2.2.1: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§2.2.2: Kohli v Manchanda, [2008] INSC 42
§2.2.3: Walker v Metropolitan Police Comm’r, [2014] EWCA Civ 897
§2.2.4: Binsaris v Northern Territory, [2020] HCA 22
Week 4.1 – Sept 24 – CLASS CANCELLED
No class Sept 24 – No additional readings
Week 4.2 – Sept 26 – Assault
§2.3: Assault
§2.3.1: Tuberville v Savage, [1669] EWHC KB J25
§2.3.2: Stephens v Myers, [1830] EWHC KB J37 (CP)
§2.3.3: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§2.3.4: Tam v Chan [2014] HKCFI 1480
§2.3.5: Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, (SCC decision if available – Ontario C.A. decision 2023 ONCA 476 if not)
Week 5 – Oct 1/3 – False Imprisonment
§2.4: False imprisonment
§2.4.1: Bird v Jones, [1845] EWHC QB J64
§2.4.2: Robertson v Balmain New Ferry Co. Ltd, [1909] UKPC 1
§2.4.3: Jeeves v Swanson, 1995 CanLII 520 (BC SC)
§2.4.4: Walker v Metropolitan Police Comm’r, [2014] EWCA Civ 897
§2.4.5: R v Le, 2019 SCC 34
Week 6 – Oct 8/10 – Intentional Infliction of Mental Suffering
§3: Intentional Infliction of Mental Suffering
§3.1: The tort in Wilkinson v. Downton
§3.1.1: Wilkinson v Downton, [1897] EWHC 1 (QB)
§3.1.2: Wainwright v Home Office, [2003] UKHL 53
§3.2: The modern tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering
§3.2.2: Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, (SCC decision if available – Ontario C.A. decision 2023 ONCA 476 if not)
§3.2.3: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§3.2.5: Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490
Week 7.1 – Oct 15 – Common Law Invasion of Privacy
§4: Invasion of Privacy
§4.1: Common law invasion of privacy torts
§4.1.1: Intrusion upon seclusion
§4.1.1.1: Wainwright v Home Office, [2003] UKHL 53
§4.1.1.2: Jones v Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32
§4.1.2: Public disclosure of private facts
§4.1.2.1: ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739
Intimate Images Protection Act, SBC 2023, c 11 https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/23011
Week 7.2 – Oct 17 – A.I. Liability for Invasion of Privacy (Zoom class or Pre-recorded lecture)
No additional readings.
Week 8 – Oct 22/24 – Statutory Invasion of Privacy
§4.2: Statutory invasion of privacy torts
§4.2.1: Privacy Act, RSBC 1996
§4.2.2: Milner v Manufacturers Life Insurance Co., 2005 BCSC 1661
§4.2.3: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§4.2.4: Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490
§4.2.5: Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v Ari, 2023 BCCA 331
§4.2.6: Bracken v Vancouver Police Board, 2006 BCSC 189
Week 9 – Oct 29/31 – Defamation
Chernesky v. Armadale Publishers [1979] 1 SCR 1067 https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2624/index.do
Vander Zalm v. Times Publishers [1980] 4 WWR 259 https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1980/1980canlii389/1980canlii389.html
§5.1: Defamation
§5.1.1: Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490
§5.1.2: Caplan v. Atas, [2021] ONSC 670
§5.1.3 Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto [1995] CanLII 59 (SCC)
§5.1.4: Grant v Torstar Corp., 2009 SCC 61
§5.1.5: Hansman v Neufeld, 2023 SCC 14
§5.1.6: Libel and Slander Act, RSBC 1996
Week 10.1 – Nov 5 – Harassment
§5.2: Harassment
§5.2.2: Merrifield v Canada, 2019 ONCA 205
§5.2.3: Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490
§5.2.4: Caplan v Atlas, 2021 ONSC 670
§5.2.5: Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2023 ONCA 476
Week 10.2 – Nov 7 – Trespass
§7: Intentional Interference with Land
§7.1: Trespass to land
§7.1.1: Entick v Carrington, (1765) 19 State Tr 1029 (KB)
§7.1.2: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§7.1.3: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§7.1.6: R v Le, 2019 SCC 34
Homework assignment – Practice Tort Fact Pattern.
Week 11.1 – Nov 12 – Reading Week
No additional readings.
Week 11.2 – Nov 14 – Special Lecture by Efrat Arbel on “Solitary Confinement and Tort law”
Optional reading: https://commons.allard.ubc.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1528&context=fac_pubs
N.B. – class will be at our regular time, but in the Lew Forum, not in Room 122
Week 12.1 – Nov 19 – Defences – Excuses & Consent
§6: Defences
§6.1: Foundational concepts
§6.2: Non-defences (excuses)
§6.2.1: Duress
§6.2.1.1: Gilbert v Stone, (1648) Style 72, 82 E.R. 539 (KB)
§6.2.2: Provocation
§6.2.2.1: Lane v Holloway, [1967] EWCA Civ 1
§6.2.3: Mistake of fact
§6.2.3.1: Wilson v New Brighton Panelbeaters Ltd, [1989] 1 NZLR 74 (NZ HC)
§6.2.4: Mistake of law
§6.2.4.1: R v Tim, 2022 SCC 12
§6.3: Consent
§6.3.1: Indicia of consent
§6.3.1.1: Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyd’s of London v Scalera, 2000 SCC 24
§6.3.1.3: Toews v Weisner, 2001 BCSC 15
In-class review/discussion of Homework Assignment
Week 12.2 – Nov 21 – Defences – Lawful Authority + Bonus Unit on Passing Off (Dishonesty and Abuse of Position)
§6.6: Lawful authority
§6.6.2: R v Tim, 2022 SCC 12
§6.6.3: R v Singer, 2023 SKCA 123
§6.6.4: Binsaris v Northern Territory, 2020 HCA 22
§6.6.5: R v Le, 2019 SCC 34
§10.6 Passing Off
§10.6.1: Dentec Safety Specialists Inc. v. Degil Safety Products Inc. [2012] ONSC 4721
§10.6.2: Further material
Week 13 – Nov 26/28 – Remedies
§9: Remedies: Damages and Injunctions
§9.1: Nominal damages
§9.1.1: Walker v Metropolitan Police Comm’r, [2014] EWCA Civ 897
9.1.2 Gabriell v Caparelli, 1974 CanLII 679 (ON CC)
§9.1.3: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§9.2: Compensatory damages—pecuniary (special)
§9.2.1: Robertson v Stang, 1997 CanLII 2122 (BC SC)
§9.2.3: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§9.2.4: ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739
§9.3: Compensatory damages—non-pecuniary (general)
§9.3.1: McCliggot v Elliott, 2022 BCCA 315
9.3.2: Hill v Church of Scientology of Toronto, 1995 CanLII 59 (SCC)
§9.3.4: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§9.3.5: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§9.3.6: Jones v Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32
§9.3.8: Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490
§9.3.9: ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739
§9.3.11: Toews v Weisner, 2001 BCSC 15
§9.4: Aggravated damages
§9.4.1: Norberg v Wynrib, 1992 CanLII 65 (SCC)
§9.4.3: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§9.4.4: Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2023 ONCA 476
§9.4.6: ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739
§9.5: Punitive (exemplary) damages
§9.5.1: Atlantic Lottery Corp. Inc. v Babstock, 2020 SCC 19
§9.5.2: Norberg v Wynrib, 1992 CanLII 65 (SCC)
§9.5.4: Gokey v Usher & Parsons, 2023 BCSC 1312
§9.5.5: Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2023 ONCA 476
§9.5.6: Fitzpatrick v Orwin, Squires & Squires, 2012 ONSC 3492
§9.5.8.: ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739
§9.5.10: Toews v Weisner, 2001 BCSC 15
§9.8: Injunctions
Week 14.1 – Dec 3 – Tort Theory
§11: Tort Theory
§11.1: Instrumental theories
§11.1.2: Judge Richard Posner
§11.2: Constructive theories
§11.2.1: Professors Jules Coleman, Scott Hershovitz and Gabriel Mendlow
§11.2.2: Professor Ernest Weinrib
§11.2.3: Professor Robert Stevens
§11.2.4: Professors John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky
§11.3: Critical theories
§11.3.1: Professors Martha Chamallas and Jennifer Wriggins
§11.3.2: Professor Kathleen Mahoney
§11.4: Reflexive theories
§11.4.1: Professor Peter Cane
§11.4.2: Professor Jane Stapleton
Week 14.2 – Dec 5 – Exam Review and Preparation
No additional readings.
Term 2 (Spring)
Week 1 – Jan 7/9 – Introduction to Negligence & Duty of Care
§13: Negligence: (i) Duty of Care
§13.1: Development of the tort of negligence
§13.1.1: Donoghue v Stevenson, [1932] UKHL 100
§13.1.2: The neighbour principle
§13.1.3: Palsgraf v Long Island Railroad Co., (1928) 248 N.Y. 339
§13.1.4: Grant v Australian Knitting Mills Ltd, [1935] UKPC 62
§13.1.5: Haley v London Electricity Board, [1964] UKHL 3
§13.1.6: Elements of the tort of negligence
Week 2 – Jan 14/16 – Duty of Care Cont’d
§13.2: Misfeasance versus nonfeasance
§13.2.3: Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd, [1970] UKHL 2
§13.3: Affirmative duty to rescue
§13.3.1: Wagner v International Railway Co., (1921) 232 NY 176 (NY CA)
§13.3.2: Horsley v MacLaren, 1971 CanLII 24 (SCC)
§13.3.3: Parable of the Good Samaritan
§13.3.4: Good Samaritan Act, RSBC 1996
Final portion of Jan 16 class will include December exam review
Week 3 – Jan 21/23 – Duty of Care Cont’d
§13.4.1: The Anns/Cooper test for a novel duty of care
§13.4.1.1: Anns v Merton London Borough Council, [1977] UKHL 4
§13.4.1.2: Cooper v Hobart, [2001] SCC 79
§13.4.2: Applying the Anns/Cooper novel duty test
§13.4.2.1: Childs v Desormeaux, Courrier & Zimmerman, 2006 SCC 18
§13.4.2.2: Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
§13.4.2.4: Der v Zhao, 2021 BCCA 82
Week 4 – Jan 28/30 – Standard of Care (Breach)
§14: Negligence: (ii) Breach of Duty of Care
§14.1: Ascertaining the standard of care
§14.1.1: Reasonable person standard
§14.1.1.1: Booth v St Catharines (City), 1948 CanLII 10 (SCC)
§14.1.1.2: Nettleship v Weston, [1971] EWCA Civ 6
§14.1.2: Relevance of statutory standards
§14.1.2.1: R v Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, 1983 CanLII 21 (SCC)
§14.1.2.2: Ryan v Victoria (City), 1999 CanLII 706 (SCC)
§14.1.2.3: Nelson (City) v Marchi, 2021 SCC 41
§14.1.3: Special knowledge, skill and experience
§14.1.3.1: McCullough v Riffert, 2010 ONSC 3891
§14.1.3.2: Powell v University Hospitals Sussex, 2023 EWHC 736 (KB)
§14.1.3.3: Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
§14.1.4: Extenuating personal characteristics
§14.1.4.1: McHale v Watson, [1966] HCA 13
§14.1.4.2: Fiala v MacDonald, 2001 ABCA 169
Week 5 – Feb 4/6 – Standard of Care (Breach) Cont’d
§14.2: Applying the standard of reasonableness
§14.2.1: Probability of harm
§14.2.1.1: Booth v St Catharines (City), 1948 CanLII 10 (SCC)
§14.2.1.2: Bolton v Stone, [1951] UKHL 2
§14.2.1.4: Lewis v Wandsworth London Borough Council, [2020] EWHC 3205 (QB)
§14.2.2: Gravity of risk
§14.2.2.1: Paris v Stepney Borough Council, [1950] UKHL 3
§14.2.2.2: Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co. Pty. Ltd (The Wagon Mound No. 2),
[1966] UKPC 10
§14.2.3: Burden of precautionary measures
§14.2.3.2: Miller v Jackson, [1977] EWCA Civ 6
§14.2.4: Social value of activity
§14.2.4.1: Watt v Hertfordshire County Council, [1954] EWCA Civ 6
§14.2.4.2: Miller v Jackson, [1977] EWCA Civ 6
§14.2.5: Custom and industry practice
§14.2.5.1: McCullough v Riffert, [2010] ONSC 3891
§14.2.5.3: Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
§14.2.6: Statutory and regulatory background
§14.2.6.1: R v Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, 1983 CanLII 21 (SCC)
§14.2.6.2: Ryan v Victoria (City), 1999 CanLII 706 (SCC)
Week 6.1 – Feb 11 – Damage
§15: Negligence: (iii) Damage
§15.1: Damage an essential element
§15.1.1: Atlantic Lottery Corp. Inc. v. Babstock, 2020 SCC 19
§15.2: Categories of compensable damage
§15.2.1: Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
Week 6.2 – Feb 13 – Factual Causation
§16: Negligence: (iv) Causation of Damage in Fact
§16.1: But-for cause of damage
§16.1.1: Hanke v Resurfice Corp., 2007 SCC 7
§16.1.2: Clements v Clements, 2012 SCC 32
§16.1.3: Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
§16.1.4: Powell v University Hospitals Sussex, [2023] EWHC 736 (KB)
§16.2: Material contribution to risk of damage
§16.2.2: Hanke v Resurfice Corp., 2007 SCC 7
§16.2.3: Clements v Clements, 2012 SCC 32
Week 7 – Feb 17/21 – Reading Week
No classes or assigned readings
Week 8 – Feb 25/27 – Legal Causation (Remoteness)
§17: Negligence: (v) Remoteness of Damage in Law
§17.1: Reasonable foreseeability of loss
§17.1.1: Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Ltd (The Wagon Mound No. 1), [1961] UKPC 2
§17.1.2: Mustapha v Culligan of Canada Ltd, 2008 SCC 27
§17.1.3: Nelson (City) v Marchi, 2021 SCC 41
§17.2: Intervening Events
§17.2.1: Booth v St Catharines (City), 1948 CanLII 10 (SCC)
§17.2.3: Bradford v Kanellos, 1973 CanLII 1285 (SCC)
§17.2.4: Athey v Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC)
§17.3: Eggshell skull plaintiffs
§17.3.2: Greenway-Brown v MacKenzie, 2019 BCCA 137
§17.4: Crumbling skull plaintiffs
§17.4.1: Athey v Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC)
Week 9.1 – Mar 4 – Apportionment of Liability
§18.2: Apportionment of liability
§18.2.1: Negligence Act, RSBC 1996
§18.2.2: Plaintiff’s contributory fault
§18.2.2.1: Marcena v Thomson, 2019 BCSC 1287
§18.2.2.2: Donahue v Belitski, 2015 SKQB 47
§18.2.3: Defendants’ joint and several liability
§18.2.3.1: British Columbia v Insurance Corp of British Columbia, 2008 SCC 3
Week 9.2 – Mar 6 – Vicarious Liability
§23.1: Common law vicarious liability
§23.1.1: Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v Ari, 2023 BCCA 331
§23.2: Statutory vicarious and direct liability
§23.2.2: Crown liability
§23.2.2.1: Provincial Crown liability statutes
§23.2.2.2: Francis v Ontario, 2021 ONCA 197
§23.2.3: Local government liability
§23.2.4: Police liability
§23.2.4.2: British Columbia v Insurance Corp of British Columbia, 2008 SCC 3
§23.2.4: Motor vehicle owner liability
Week 10.1 – Mar 11 – Negligent Treatment of Indigenous Children
§19.7: Negligent treatment of Indigenous children
§19.7.2: Blackwater v Plint, 2005 SCC 58
§19.7.3: Brown v Canada, 2017 ONSC 251
Week 10.2 – Mar 13 – Negligence in hosting patrons/guests
§19.9: Negligence in hosting patrons and guests
§19.9.1: Stewart v Pettie, 1995 CanLII 147 (SCC)
§19.9.2: McCormick v Plambeck, 2020 BCSC 881, aff’d 2022 BCCA 219
Week 11.1 – Mar 18 – Negligent infliction of mental injury
§19.2: Negligent infliction of mental injury
§19.2.1: Close-call traumatic events
§19.2.1.3: Saadati v Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28
§19.2.2: Witnessing traumatic events
§19.2.2.2: Marcena v Thomson, 2019 BCSC 1287
§19.2.2: Learning of traumatic events
§19.2.3.2: Snowball v Ornge, 2017 ONSC 4601
Week 11.2 – Mar 20 – Negligent performance of professional services – medical practitioners
§19.4.3.3: Armstrong v Ward, 2019 ONCA 963, rev’d 2021 SCC 1
Ediger v Johnston, 2013 SCC 18 https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12961/index.do
The Duty to Warn
Reibl v Hughes, [1980] SCN No 105 (SCC) https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2563/index.do
Week 12.1 – Mar 25 – Negligence of Public Services/Authorities
§19.5.1: Emergency Services
§19.5.1.1: Jane Doe v Toronto Police Comm’rs, 1990 CanLII 661 (ON Div Ct)
§19.5.1.3: Attorney General of Canada & Emil Anderson Maintenance Co. Ltd v. Taylor [2024] BCCA 156
§19.5.2: Government Services
§19.5.2.2: Nelson (City) v Marchi, 2021 SCC 41
§19.5.2.3: Francis v Ontario, 2021 ONCA 197
Week 12.2 – Mar 27 – No fault compensation schemes/no fault debate
§12.1: New Zealand’s no-fault accident compensation scheme
§12.1.1: Overview of New Zealand’s ACC scheme
§12.2: No-fault workplace injury compensation schemes
§12.2.1: WorkSafe BC
§12.2.2: British Columbia workers’ compensation scheme
§12.3: No-fault vehicular injury insurance schemes
§12.3.1: Insurance Corporation of British Columbia’s Enhanced Care Scheme
§12.3.2: Enhanced Care at a glance
Week 13.1 – April 1/3 – Review/Catch-up
No additional readings.
Week 14 – Apr 8 – Exam Prep.
No additional readings.
LAW 459 002 Business Organizations
Intellectual Property Law