1 / 11

Duty of Care and Negligence

Duty of Care and Negligence. Alex Bradley, Fraser Turner, Sarah Arnold, Laura Holt and Courtney MacPhail. Myers v. Peel County Board of Education Supreme Court of Canada December 6, 1972 . Questions Before the Court. Was the equipment (mats) adequate?.

yukio
Download Presentation

Duty of Care and Negligence

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Duty of Care and Negligence Alex Bradley, Fraser Turner, Sarah Arnold, Laura Holt and Courtney MacPhail

  2. Myers v. Peel County Board of Education Supreme Court of Canada December 6, 1972

  3. Questions Before the Court Was the equipment (mats) adequate?

  4. THORNTON et al. v. BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 57 et al. British Columbia Supreme Court 1978

  5. Questions Before the Court Does Edamura have any reason to believe that Gary Thornton contained a high degree of proficiency in the gymnastics he was performing? Was the equipment determined to be reasonably safe for the purpose for which it is intended and was it suitably arranged? Did Edamura provide an adequate duty of care to act as the "careful parent of a large family" -- a concept adopted almost universally since Williams v. Eady (1893), 10 T.L.R. 41. Was Gary Thornton contributorily negligent?

  6. Fraser v. Campbell River School District No. 72 Cambell River, British Columbia November 1st 1984

  7. Questions Before the Court • Did Mr. Lawrason expose the boys to an undue risk of harm? • Could Mr. Lawrason have anticipated that injury might occur? • Could Mr. Lawrason have anticipated the dive?

  8. Bain (Guardian ad litem of) v. Calgary Board of Education Alberta Court of Queens Bench June 3rd, 1987

  9. Questions Before the Court • Did the defendant teacher owe a duty of care to the Plaintiff? • If a duty of care existed, what standard of care was required and was the standard met? • Did the failure to meet the standard of care cause the harm suffered? • Did the Plaintiff voluntarily accept the risk? (volentidefense) • Was the Plaintiff contributorily negligent?

  10. MAINVILLE v. OTTAWA BOARD OF EDUCATION AND MACLEAN Ottawa Small Claims Court February 2nd, 1989

  11. Questions Before the Court Was there a duty of care owed by the school authorities to provide supervision of its students? Did the school breach that duty of care by not providing supervision? Was such a breach of duty the sole cause of the plaintiff’s son’s injuries?

More Related