FD: ACN=4836 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 816/87 STY:Pritchett et al. v. O'Sullivan et al. PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Preston DDATE: ACT: 15, 8(9),
|
|
- Angela Ball
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 FD: ACN=4836 ACC=R FD: DT:D DN: 816/87 STY:Pritchett et al. v. O'Sullivan et al. PANEL: Thomas; Robillard; Preston DDATE: ACT: 15, 8(9), 8(10), 8(11) KEYW: Right to sue; Supplier of motor vehicle, machinery or equipment; Damages, contribution or indemnity. SUM: Plaintiff's right of action taken away as against defendant driver but not taken away as against leasing company that leased vehicle to driver's employer. Right to damages restricted so as not to include damages attributable to driver. PDCON: TYPE:15; S DIST: DECON: 337, 725 SCON: Family Law Reform Act R.S.O 1980 c. 152, s. 60 CCON: Ling v. Transamerica Commercial Corp. 31 O.R. (2d) 32 IDATE: HDATE: TCO:G. Dee KEYPER:M. Hayden; S. Fixter; R. Kostyniuk XREF: COMMENTS: TEXT:
2 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 816/87 IN THE MATTER OF an application pursuant to section 15 of the Workers' Compensation Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 539, as amended. AND IN THE MATTER OF an action commenced in the District Court of Ontario at the City of Toronto as Action No /86. B E T W E E N: IVAN PRITCHETT PARKWOOD CENTRAL LEASING LIMITED AND RAFFAELE PORCO Applicants in this application and Defendants in the District Court of Ontario Action. MICHAEL O'SULLIVAN AND YWETTE O'SULLIVAN Respondents in this application and Plaintiffs in the District Court of Ontario Action.
3 WORKERS' COMPENSATlON APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 816/87 IN THE MATTER OF an application pursuant to section 15 of the Workers' Compensation Act. AND IN THE MATTER OF an action commenced in the District Court of Ontario at the City of Toronto as Action No /86. B E T W E E N: IVAN PRITCHETT PARKOOD CENTRAL LEASING LIMITED AND RAFFAELE PORCO Applicants/Defendants - and - MICHAEL O'SULLIVAN AND YVETTE O'SULLIVAN Respondents/Plaintiffs WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT SECTION 15 APPLICATION
4 WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 816/87 This Section 15 Application was heard on July 27, 1987, by: J. Thomas : Panel Chairman, M. Robillard: Tribunal Member representative of workers, K.V. Preston: Tribunal Member representative of employers. THE SECTION 15 APPLICATION This application arises out of a lawsuit commenced in the District Court of Ontario as Action No /86. The Plaintiffs in that lawsuit are Michael O'Sullivan and Yvette O'Sullivan. Yvette O'Sullivan claims under the provisions of the Family Law Reform Act. The Plaintiffs are the Respondents in this application. The Defendants in the lawsuit are Ivan Pritchett, Parkwood Central Leasing Limited ("Parkwood") and Raffaele Porco. Parkwood and Mr. Pritchett are the Applicants to this Section 15 Application. They were represented by M. Hayden, solicitor. Mr. Porco supported the application and was represented by S. Fixter, solicitor. The Plaintiff/Respondents were represented by R. Kostyniuk, solicitor. The Panel was assisted at the outset of the hearing by G. Dee from the Tribunal Counsel Office. Mr. O'Sullivan's employer, Clifford Electronics, was given notice of the hearing. An individual from Clifford Electronics attended at the Tribunal on the day of the hearing, but was advised that evidence from Clifford Electronics would not be necessary. The individual from Clifford Electronics did not attend the hearing. THE EVIDENCE The Applicant's statement of argument and evidence was marked as Exhibit 1. The statement of fact and law of the Respondent Raffaele Porco was marked as Exhibit 2. The Respondents' statement was marked as Exhibit 3. The Respondent, Michael O'Sullivan, testified at the hearing. THE NATURE OF THE CASE The lawsuit giving rise to this application resulted from a motor vehicle accident which occurred on January 14, Messrs. O'Sullivan, Pritchett and Porco were driving separate vehicles which were involved in collisions with one another. Mr. Pritchett was driving a vehicle which was owned by Parkwood and leased to Mr. Pritchett's employer, United Corrugated Packaging. Section 8(9) of the Workers' Compensation Act sets out the circumstances in which a right of action is taken away. In effect, a right of action is
5 2 taken away where the workers of Schedule 1 employers were in the course of their employment at the time of the happening of the injury. Sect!o" 8(9) be found in the appendix to this decision. At the outset of the hearing, the parties agreed that Mr. Pritchett was a worker of a Schedule 1 employer and was in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. The parties also agreed that Mr. Porco was not in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. The parties further agreed that Mr. O'Sullivan was a worker of a Schedule 1 employer. Mr. O'Sullivan described for the Panel his actions on January 14, 1985, at the time of the accident. We are satisfied, and it was not disputed by Mr. Kostyniuk, that Mr. O'Sullivan was in the course of his employment as a television repairman when the accident occurred. Accordingly, we conclude that Mr. O'Sullivan's right of action against Mr. Pritchett is taken away by section 8(9) of the Workers' Compensation Act. we also conclude, and it was not disputed, that the right of action of Yvette O'Sullivan, claiming under the provisions of the Family Law Reform Act is likewise taken away against Mr. Pritchett. e further conclude that the Plaintiffs' right of action against Mr. Porco is not taken away by the Workers' Compensation Act because it was agreed that Mr. Porco was not in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. The issues that fall to be determined in this application are the following: 1. Does the Workers' Compensation Act protect Parkwood against the lawsuit brought by the O'Sullivans? 2. What effect does section 8(11) have on the right to recover damages? THE PANEL S REASON (i) Was the Workers' Compensation Act protect Parkwood against the lawsuit bought by the O'Sullivans? Parkwood leased a vehicle to Mr. Pritchett's employer. In our view, Parkwood is not afforded the protection against lawsuits which is found in section 8(9). This protection is taken away by section 8(10) which provides as follows: 8(10) Subsection (9) does not apply where the employer has supplied a motor vehicle, machinery or equipment on a purchase or rental basis without also supplying workers to operate such motor vehicle, machinery or equipment. In our view, Parkwood is an employer who has supplied a motor vehicle on a rental basis without also supplying workers to operate the vehicle. Accordingly, the right of action against Parkwood is not defeated by section 8(9). A similar situation faced another panel of this Tribunal in In that decision, the Hearing Panel described in detail the operation of section 8(10). we concur with the reasoning in that decision.
6 3 (ii) what effect does section 8(11) have on the right to recover damages? The Workers' Compensation Act not only places restrictions on a plaintiff's right of action but also on the Plaintiff's right to recover damages. We have concluded that the O'Sullivans' right of action cannot be maintained against Mr. Pritchett but can go forward against Parkwood and Mr. Porco. Obviously, if a party's right of action is taken away, there can be no right to recover damages against that party because the lawsuit is finished with respect to that party. However, where the right of action is not taken away, section 8(11) of the Act imposes certain restrictions on a plaintiff's right to recover damages in circumstances where one or more of the Defendants is a Schedule 1 worker or employer. Section 8(11) is set out in the appendix. Decision No. 725 addressed the issue of whether a plaintiff has a right of recovery against a leasing company for negligence caused by a Schedule 1 worker who was the driver of the leased vehicle. That situation is analogous to this case. The Panel reviewed the relevant law, including the Divisional Court decision in Ling v. Transamerica Commercial Corp. Ltd. (1980) 31 O.R. 32 (Divisional Court)- In the case, the Divisional Court stated at page 36: It seems to me that the intention of the legislature was to confer jurisdiction to bar, in the facts of this case, recovery of damages against the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident giving rise to the litigation, even though the owner is a stranger to the act. If the Plaintiff's submission is correct, and subsection 11 is inapplicable to Transamerica, then it would follow that Transamerica would be liable to pay 100% of the damages but it would be deprived of its common law right of indemnity from driver Buettner. If it was the legislative intention to deprive Transamerica of its common law right of indemnity from the driver Buettner, would not the legislature have used different language? I think so. The Hearing Panel in Decision No. 725 adopted the reasoning of the Divisional Court and concluded at page 9 of Decision No. 725: This means that Grant Brown Leasing Inc. is subject to suit, but that pursuant to section 8(11) it is not liable for the negligence of the worker of an employer who has leased a vehicle or the negligence of any Schedule 1 employer or employee. We agree with the reasoning in the case and in Decision No We conclude that the Plaintiffs do not have a right of recovery against Parkwood for the negligence of Mr. Pritchett. Were we to find otherwise, we would impose liability on Parkwood who would be deprived of its common law right of indemnity from Mr. Pritchett. Similarly, we conclude that the effect of section 8(11) is to prevent the Plaintiffs from recovering damages from Mr. Porco for the portion of negligence occasioned by Mr. Pritchett. As was indicated in Decision No. 337 of this Tribunal, section 8(11) is an apportionment section. It prevents plaintiffs from recovering "damages contribution or indemnity... for the port!on of the
7 4 loss or damage caused by the fault or negl{ence of a worker in Schedule 1..." In our view, the effect of section 8(11) is to render Mr. Porco severally liable for damages. This means that he is responsible for his own direct negligence, just as Parkwood would be responsible for its own direct negligence. He is not, however, responsible for the portion of the negligence that may ultimately be attributed to Mr. Pritchett. THE DECISION The application is allowed. The Panel concludes that the Plaintiffs' right of action against the Defendant, Ivan Pritchett, is taken away by the Workers' Compensation Act. The Panel further concludes that the Plaintiffs' right of action against Parkwood Central Leasing Limited and Raffaele Porco is not taken away by the Workers' Compensation Act. However, the Plaintiffs' right to damages against Parkwood Central Leasing Limited and Raffaele Porco is restricted so as not to include the portion of damages which is attributed to the Defendant, Ivan Pritchett. DATED at Toronto, this 2nd day of September, SIGNED: J. Thomas, M. Robillard, K.W. Preston.
8 APPENDIX 8(9) No employer in Schedule 1 and no worker of an employer in Schedule 1 or dependant of such worker has a right of action for damages against any employer in Schedule 1 or any worker of such employer, for an injury for which benefits are payable under this Act, where the workers of both employers were in the course of their employment at the time of the happening of the injury, but, in any case where the Board is satisfied that the accident giving rise to the injury was caused by the negligence of some other employer or employers in Schedule 1 or their workers, the Board may direct that the benefits awarded in any such case or a proportion of them shall be charged against the class or group to which such other employer or employers belong and to the accident cost record of such individual employer or employers. 8(11) In any action brought by a worker of an employer in Schedule 1 or dependant of such worker in any case within subsection (1) or maintained by the Board under subsection (4) and one or more of the persons found to be at fault or negligent is the employer of the worker in Schedule 1, or any other employer in Schedule 1, or any worker of any employer in Schedule 1, no damages, contribution or indemnity are recoverable for the portion of the loss or damage caused by the fault or negligence of such employer of the worker in Schedule 1, or of any other employer in Schedule 1, and the portion of the loss or damage so caused by the fault or negligence of such employer of the worker in Schedule 1, or of any other employer in Schedule 1, shall be determined although such employer or worker is not a party to the action.
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 357/93 STY:Ontario Hydro v. Frontier Hydraulics Ltd. PANEL: Faubert; M. Cook; Ronson DDATE: ACT: *10(12) KEYW: Right to sue
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 357/93 STY:Ontario Hydro v. Frontier Hydraulics Ltd. PANEL: Faubert; M. Cook; Ronson DDATE:220793 ACT: *10(12) KEYW: Right to sue (third party claims); Damages, contribution or indemnity.
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 211/88 STY: GREEN FOREST LUMBER LTD. et al. v. FORSTER et al and one other action PANEL: Newman; Cook; Apsey DDATE: ACT: 15;
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 211/88 STY: GREEN FOREST LUMBER LTD. et al. v. FORSTER et al and one other action PANEL: Newman; Cook; Apsey DDATE: 040688 ACT: 15; 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; Independent operator;
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 977/88 STY: HRYHORUK v. EASBY PANEL: Strachan; Cook; Nipshagen DDATE: ACT: 15, 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; In the
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 977/88 STY: HRYHORUK v. EASBY PANEL: Strachan; Cook; Nipshagen DDATE: 100489 ACT: 15, 8(9) KEYW: Section 15 application; In the course of employment (reasonably incidental activity test);
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 846/93 STY:Holt Renfrew Canada v. Nicol PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue (wrongful dismissal).
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 846/93 STY:Holt Renfrew Canada v. Nicol PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Chapman DDATE:130694 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue (wrongful dismissal). SUM: The defendant in a civil case applied to determine
More informationRight to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work).
SUMMARY 892/91 DECISION NO. 892/91 Brunino v. Principe PANEL: McCombie; Thomspon; Nipshagen DATE: 11/05/92 Right to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work). Two defendants in a civil
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 BEFORE: R. McCutcheon: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 28, 2015 at Toronto Oral hearing Post-hearing activity completed on September 10, 2015
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 613/90I2 STY:Barton v. Air Ontario Inc. PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Apsey DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 613/90I2 STY:Barton v. Air Ontario Inc. PANEL: Moore; Jackson; Apsey DDATE: 091092 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (travelling); Jurisdiction, Tribunal (right to sue)
More informationFD: FD: DT:D DN: 650/91 STY:N. Turk Investments Ltd. v. Opar PANEL: Hartman; Ferrari; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of
FD: FD: DT:D DN: 650/91 STY:N. Turk Investments Ltd. v. Opar PANEL: Hartman; Ferrari; Chapman DDATE: 080792 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (parking lots). SUM: The defendants in a
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
2003 ONWSIAT 1955 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 234/03 [1] This right to sue application was heard in London on February 4, 2003, by Vice-Chair M. Kenny. THE RIGHT TO SUE
More informationFD: FD: DT: D DN: 637/93 STY: Sharman v. Allard PANEL: Moore; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE: ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment
FD: FD: DT: D DN: 637/93 STY: Sharman v. Allard PANEL: Moore; M. Cook; Chapman DDATE: 040595 ACT: KEYW: Right to sue; In the course of employment (travelling); Employer (definition of) (contract of hiring);
More informationThe right of action was taken away since the parties were in the course of employment at the time of the accident. [10 pages]
DECISION NO. 270 / 93 SUMMARY Right to sue; In the course of employment (parking lots); Legal precedent (consistency). The defendant in a civil case applied to determine whether the plaintiffs right of
More informationCONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ACT
c t CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to December 2, 2015. It is intended for information
More informationas amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT
(SA GG 5689) came into force in South Africa and South West Africa on date of publication: 1 June 1956 (see section 6 of Act) APPLICABILITY TO SOUTH WEST AFRICA: Section 6 originally stated This Act shall
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 955/09 BEFORE: J. Josefo: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 13, 2009 at Ottawa Oral DATE OF DECISION: June 16, 2009 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2009 ONWSIAT 1450
More informationThe Contributory Negligence Act
1 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE c. C-31 The Contributory Negligence Act being Chapter C-31 of The Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978 (effective February 26, 1979) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan,
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 194/16
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 194/16 BEFORE: S. Martel: Vice-Chair HEARING: January 21, 2016 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: March 23, 2016 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2016 ONWSIAT
More informationCHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS
Cap.107] CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS Act No. 12 of 1968. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW RELATING TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 808/15
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 808/15 BEFORE: J. Josefo: Vice-Chair HEARING: April 23, 2015 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: May 13, 2015 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2015 ONWSIAT 1038
More informationWORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1806/09
WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1806/09 BEFORE: J. P. Moore : Vice-Chair HEARING: June 17, 2010 at Toronto Oral DATE OF DECISION: July 27, 2010 NEUTRAL CITATION: 2010 ONWSIAT
More informationINDIVISIBLE INJURIES
INDIVISIBLE INJURIES Amelia J. Staunton February 2011 1 CONTACT LAWYER Amelia Staunton 604.891.0359 astaunton@dolden.com 1 Introduction What happens when a Plaintiff, recovering from injuries sustained
More informationRestatement (Second) of Torts 496A (1965) Assumption of Risk
Restatement (Second) of Torts 496A (1965) Assumption of Risk A plaintiff who voluntarily assumes a risk of harm arising from the negligent or reckless conduct of the defendant cannot recover for such harm.
More informationAND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT, S.O. 1991, c. 17; AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION JEVCO INSURANCE COMPANY. - and -
IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. I. 8, section 275 and REGULATION 283/95 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT, S.O. 1991, c. 17; AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN: JEVCO
More informationPresent: Dickson C.J. and Beetz, McIntyre, Lamer and La Forest JJ. in effect when accident occurred--statutes barring action repealed before action
angus v. sun alliance insurance co., [1988] 2 S.C.R. 256 Sun Alliance Insurance Company v. Diane Hart Angus Appellant Respondent and Owen Hart and James Angus Respondents INDEXED AS: ANGUS v. SUN ALLIANCE
More informationc 82 Compensation for Victims of Crime Act
Ontario: Revised Statutes 1980 c 82 Compensation for Victims of Crime Act Ontario Queen's Printer for Ontario, 1980 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/rso Bibliographic
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs ) Defendant ) DECISION ON COSTS
BROCKVILLE COURT FILE NO.: 05-0083 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE B E T W E E N: DUSKA BARKLEY, PEYTON BARKLEY, Jonathan A. Schwartzman, for the Plaintiffs MARATHA BARKLEY, by their Litigation Guardian,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2014-00133 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND ANAND SINGH Defendant AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD
More informationCustomer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.
Customer (C) v. Businessman (B) Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Negligence requires a Breach of a Duty that Causes Damages. A. Duty B had a duty to drive as
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) LTD t/a AVIS RENT A CAR NDWAMATO PHINIAS LAVHENGWA JUDGMENT
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL
More informationNOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL
NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Applicant: [X] Respondents: [X] and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (Board) SECTION 29 APPLICATION DECISION Representatives: [X] Action:
More informationCitation: Gallant v. Piccott Date: PESCAD 17 Docket: AD-0859 Registry: Charlottetown
Citation: Gallant v. Piccott Date: 20000518 2000 PESCAD 17 Docket: AD-0859 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - APPEAL DIVISION BETWEEN: STEPHEN ARTHUR PICCOTT,
More informationNumber 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED. Updated to 13 April 2017
Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED Updated to 13 April 2017 This Revised Act is an administrative consolidation of the. It is prepared by the Law Reform Commission in accordance with its
More informationCase Name: Laudon v. Roberts. Between Rick Laudon, Plaintiff, and Will Roberts and Keith Sullivan, Defendants. [2007] O.J. No.
Page 1 Case Name: Laudon v. Roberts Between Rick Laudon, Plaintiff, and Will Roberts and Keith Sullivan, Defendants [2007] O.J. No. 1414 156 A.C.W.S. (3d) 844 49 C.P.C. (6th) 311 2007 CarswellOnt 2191
More informationTorts Tutorial Chapter 6 Joint Tortfeasors
INTRODUCTION This program is designed to provide a review of basic concepts covered in a first-year torts class and is based on DeWolf, Cases and Materials on Torts (http://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/~dewolf/torts/text
More informationGENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS
GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS PART 44 PART 44 Contents of this Part Rule 44.1 Rule 44.2 Rule 44.3 Rule 44.3A Rule 44.3B Rule 44.3C Rule 44.4 Rule 44.5 Rule 44.6 Rule 44.7 Rule 44.8 Rule 44.9 Rule 44.10 Rule
More informationPUBLIC ACCOUNTS IMPLEMENTATION TRIBUNAL ACT
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS IMPLEMENTATION TRIBUNAL ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1. Establishment of the Public Accounts Implementation Tribunal. 2. Membership of the Tribunal. 3. Appointment of Secretary to the Tribunal.
More informationDECISION NUMBER 345 / 91 SUMMARY
DECISION NUMBER 345 / 91 SUMMARY W was the owner of two companies, an outpost camping company and a commercial air service which transported clients to the camp sites. R was an employee of the camping
More informationCivil Liability Legislation Amendment Act 2008 No 84
New South Wales Civil Liability Legislation Amendment Act 2008 No 84 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Civil Liability Act 2002 No 22 2 4 Amendment of other Acts 2 5 Repeal
More informationKY DRAM SHOP MEMO II
I. Kentucky s Dram Shop Act KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II KRS 413.241 Legislative finding; limitation on liability of licensed sellers or servers of intoxicating beverages; liability of intoxicated person (1) The
More informationProportionate Liability in Queensland: An Overview
Bond Law Review Volume 17 Issue 2 Article 4 2005 Proportionate Liability in Queensland: An Overview Paul Holmes Follow this and additional works at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr This Article is
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: ^ES*JjEf.
More informationGuide. Applying for Compensation for a Death. Social Justice Tribunals Ontario. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board
Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Providing fair and accessible justice Criminal Injuries Compensation Board Guide Applying for Compensation for a Death 0311E (2018/02) Disponible en français Page 1 of
More information2014 ONSC 4841 Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Cruz v. McPherson CarswellOnt 11387, 2014 ONSC 4841, 244 A.C.W.S. (3d) 720
2014 ONSC 4841 Ontario Superior Court of Justice Cruz v. McPherson 2014 CarswellOnt 11387, 2014 ONSC 4841, 244 A.C.W.S. (3d) 720 Terra Cruz and Carmen Cruz, Plaintiffs and Jason Mcpherson, 546291 Ontario
More informationUniform Class Proceedings Act
8-1 Uniform Law Conference of Canada Uniform Class Proceedings Act 8-2 Table of Contents PART I: DEFINITIONS 1 Definitions PART II: CERTIFICATION 2 Plaintiff s class proceeding 3 Defendant s class proceeding
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/07/ :51 PM
Exhibit G FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/25/2016 02/07/2017 04:42 02:51 PM INDEX NO. 156798/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 22 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/25/2016 02/07/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY
More informationCivil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92
New South Wales Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Civil Liability Act 2002 No 22 2 4 Consequential repeals
More informationand DAWN MacKINNON Defendant 1 and PRIMMUM INSURANCE COMPANY INC
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COURT FILE NO. 03B-6288 B E T W E E N : KYLE JOHN CLIFFORD and DAWN MacKINNON Defendant 1 and PRIMMUM INSURANCE COMPANY INC COURT FILE NO. 04-B7248 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT
More informationLegal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Implications for Personal Injury Litigation
www.mcdermottqc.com Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill covers a wide
More informationPART I. PRELIMINARY. 1. Interpretation.
[Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) (Basic Protection Compensation) Act (Chapter 296) consolidated to No 51 of 2000] INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. CHAPTER No. 296. Motor Vehicles (Third Party
More informationIn the Court of Appeals of Georgia
WHOLE COURT NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules/ July
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 03/14/ :00 AM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/14/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS --------------------------------------------------------------------------X LANCER INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o Index No.: 503344/2017 KIM WILLIAMS Plaintiffs,
More informationSecond Regular Session. Sixty-second General Assembly LLS NO Debbie Haskins HOUSE BILL STATE OF COLORADO.
Second Regular Session Sixty-second General Assembly LLS NO. 00-0.01 Debbie Haskins HOUSE BILL 00-1 STATE OF COLORADO BY REPRESENTATIVE Williams T.; also SENATOR Owen. A BILL FOR AN ACT 1 CONCERNING THE
More informationCase 3:10-cv MLC -DEA Document 10 Filed 06/24/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 112
Case 310-cv-00494-MLC -DEA Document 10 Filed 06/24/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID 112 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ROBERT JOHNSON, et al., CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-494 (MLC)
More informationTERMS AND CONDITIONS OF TRADE
BONEDA PTY LTD TRADING AS GROOVE TILES & STONE A.B.N 252 484 506 27 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF TRADE 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1 Unless otherwise inconsistent with the context the word person shall include a corporation;
More informationInsight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #26 11 August 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to
More informationNovember/December 2001
A publication of the Boston Bar Association Pro Rata Tort Contribution Is Outdated In Our Era of Comparative Negligence Matthew C. Baltay is an associate in the litigation department at Foley Hoag. His
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 21738/2014 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (2) REVISED...... DATE SIGNATURE
More informationCuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03
JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place
More informationNo. 47,314-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * * * * * * *
Judgment rendered September 26, 2012. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, LSA-CCP. No. 47,314-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * JACQUELINE
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS-- CIVIL CASES (NO. 98-2) No. 93,320 [October 8, 1998] WELLS, J. The Florida Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases (the
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MICHAEL P. HUGHES, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 26, 2010 v No. 293354 Mackinac Circuit Court SHEPLER, INC., LC No. 07-006370-NO and Defendant-Appellee, CNA
More informationPresent: Hassell, C.J., Lacy, Koontz, Kinser, Lemons, and Agee, JJ., and Russell, S.J.
Present: Hassell, C.J., Lacy, Koontz, Kinser, Lemons, and Agee, JJ., and Russell, S.J. SHERMAN DREHER, ET AL. v. Record No. 052508 OPINION BY JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER September 15, 2006 BUDGET RENT-A-CAR
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Page 1 of 15 Home Feedback Site Map Français Home Court of Appeal for Ontario Superior Court of Justice Ontario Court of Justice Location Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court Appeal Information Package
More informationGuide. Applying for Compensation for an Injury. Social Justice Tribunals Ontario. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board
Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Providing fair and accessible justice Criminal Injuries Compensation Board Guide Applying for Compensation for an Injury 010E (2016/12) Queen s Printer for Ontario, 2016
More informationCHARITY & NFP LAW BULLETIN NO. 414
CHARITY & NFP LAW BULLETIN NO. 414 JANUARY 31, 2018 EDITOR: TERRANCE S. CARTER WHEN WAIVERS FAIL: THE IMPACT OF IMPRECISE LANGUAGE AND RESULTING LIABILITY By Sean S. Carter & Barry W. Kwasniewski * A.
More informationNumber: 1124/1/1/09 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL. Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB. 3 November 2011
43B 44BCase 45B 46B 47B 53B 52B 51B 48B 42BNeutral citation [2011] CAT 37 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB Number: 1124/1/1/09 3 November 2011 49Before:
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 19, 2008
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 19, 2008 CHERYL L. GRAY v. ALEX V. MITSKY, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 03C-2835 Hamilton V.
More informationVictoria House Bloomsbury Place 26 November 2014 London WC1A 2EB. Before: PETER FREEMAN CBE QC (HON) (Chairman) BRIAN LANDERS STEPHEN WILKS
Neutral citation [2014] CAT 19 IN THE COMPETITION Case Number: 1226/2/12/14 APPEAL TRIBUNAL Victoria House Bloomsbury Place 26 November 2014 London WC1A 2EB BETWEEN: Before: PETER FREEMAN CBE QC (HON)
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 115,360 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. JESSECA PATTERSON, Appellant, KAYCE CLOUD, Appellee.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 115,360 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS JESSECA PATTERSON, Appellant, v. KAYCE CLOUD, Appellee. MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed. Appeal from Johnson District
More informationPage: 2 [2] The plaintiff had been employed by the defendant for over twelve years when, in 2003, the defendant sold part of its business to Cimco Ref
COURT FILE NO.: 68/04 DATE: 20050214 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT LANE, MATLOW and GROUND JJ. 2005 CanLII 3384 (ON SCDC B E T W E E N: Patrick Boland Appellant (Plaintiff - and -
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida LABARGA, J. No. SC09-2238 MARIA CEVALLOS, Petitioner, vs. KERI ANN RIDEOUT, et al., Respondents. [November 21, 2012] Maria Cevallos seeks review of the decision of the Fourth District
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS AJAX PAVING INDUSTRIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED July 1, 2010 APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION August 31, 2010 9:10 a.m. v No. 288452 Wayne Circuit
More informationILLINOIS LAW MANUAL CHAPTER I CIVIL PROCEDURE. On June 11, 2003, Section was amended. The change specifically prohibits
If you have questions or would like further information regarding Joint and Several Liability, please contact: David Flynn 312-540-7662 dflynn@querrey.com Result Oriented. Success Driven. www.querrey.com
More informationCase 2:15-cv AJS Document 36 Filed 08/20/15 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:15-cv-00888-AJS Document 36 Filed 08/20/15 Page 1 of 14 JUSTIN WATSON, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff, v. 15cv0888 ELECTRONICALLY FILED AMERICAN
More informationSTATE OF MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW
STATE OF MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Kevin L. Fritz Patrick E. Foppe Lashly & Baer, P.C. 714 Locust Street St. Louis, MO 63101 Tel: (314) 436-8309 Email: klfritz@lashlybaer.com pfoppe@lashlybaer.com
More informationREASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL
REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TORONTO LICENSING TRIBUNAL Date of Hearing: Panel: Aly N. Alibhai (Chair); (Hedy) Anna Walsh and Keith Cooper, Members Re: Kevin Singh (Report No. 6888) Applicant for a Tow
More informationAPPENDIX. Supplement No. published with [Extraordinary Gazette] No. dated, 2015.
APPENDIX CAYMAN ISLANDS Supplement No. published with [Extraordinary Gazette] No. dated, 2015. A BILL FOR A LAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF THE PRIVATE FUNDING OF LITIGATION; AND FOR INCIDENTAL AND
More informationContractual Remedies Act 1979
Reprint as at 1 September 2017 Contractual Remedies Act 1979 Public Act 1979 No 11 Date of assent 6 August 1979 Commencement see section 1(2) Contractual Remedies Act 1979: repealed, on 1 September 2017,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 11, 2006 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 11, 2006 Session FIDES NZIRUBUSA v. UNITED IMPORTS, INC., ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 03C-1769 Hamilton Gayden,
More informationcv 1S~'S~V I&~ Court File No.
cv 1S~'S~V I&~ Court File No. ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: (Court seal) METROPOLITAN TORONTO CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION NO. 933 Plaintiff - and- ICC PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD., and MASSIMO MUSSO
More informationCourt of Appeals, State of Michigan ORDER. Michael J. Talbot, Chief Judge, acting under MCR 7.21 l(e)(2), orders:
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan ORDER Michael J. Talbot, Chief Judge, acting under MCR 7.21 l(e)(2), orders: The opinions in the following appeals are hereby AMENDED to correct a clerical error in
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR COURT OF APPEAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Weir s Construction Limited v. Warford (Estate), 2018 NLCA 5 Date: January 22, 2018 Docket: 201601H0092 BETWEEN: WEIR S CONSTRUCTION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002 LANA MARLER, ET AL. v. BOBBY E. SCOGGINS Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rhea County No. 18471 Buddy D. Perry, Judge
More informationPage: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL
Page: 1 PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND COURT OF APPEAL Citation: Hubley v. Hubley Estate 2011 PECA 19 Date: 20111124 Docket: S1-CA-1211 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND: DENISE
More informationPART 11: RECOVERABLE COSTS OF LITIGATION, ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND SANCTIONS
PART 11: RECOVERABLE COSTS OF LITIGATION, ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND SANCTIONS What this Part is about: This Part deals with: how the Court may make an order or direction with respect to costs in a proceeding;
More informationDiversity Jurisdiction -- Admissibility of Evidence and the "Outcome-Determinative" Test
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 7-1-1961 Diversity Jurisdiction -- Admissibility of Evidence and the "Outcome-Determinative" Test Jeff D. Gautier
More informationFIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998
FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998 IN exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Section 25 of the High Court Act, I hereby make the following Rules: Citation 1.
More informationUNIT 8: HANDLING OF CLAIMS
UNIT 8: HANDLING OF CLAIMS 74 Learning outcomes After completing Unit 8, you should be able to do the following: Identify the claimants who are either fully or partially incapacitated as well as those
More informationHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT ANALYSIS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT ANALYSIS BILL #: HB 491 RELATING TO: SPONSOR(S): TIED BILL(S): Comparative Fault/Negligence Cases Representatives Baker, Kottkamp, and others None
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/18/ :49 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/18/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------X CATHERINE SANTIAGO, Plaintiff, - against - THIRD-PARTY SUMMONS Index No.:
More informationMotion for Rehearing Denied August 4, 1983 COUNSEL
TAYLOR V. DELGARNO TRANSP., INC., 1983-NMSC-052, 100 N.M. 138, 667 P.2d 445 (S. Ct. 1983) BILLY THOMAS TAYLOR, Plaintiff, vs. DELGARNO TRANSPORTATION, INC., a corporation, and BMS INDUSTRIES, INC., a corporation,
More informationJUDGMENT AND ORDER AFFIRMED. Division IV Opinion by: JUDGE VOGT Lichtenstein and Plank*, JJ., concur. Announced: August 7, 2008
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals Nos.: 07CA0940 & 07CA1512 Jefferson County District Court No. 04CV1468 Honorable Jane A. Tidball, Judge Whitney Brody, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State Farm Mutual
More informationHIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Not Reportable Not of interest to other Judges CASE NO: 4945/2016 In the matter between: S'MANGALISO HENDRY NGWENY A Plaintiff and ROAD ACCIDENT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DENNIS G. HUCKINS. MARK MCSWEENEY & a. Argued: February 12, 2014 Opinion Issued: April 11, 2014
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationSpecial Civil A Guide to the Court
New Jersey Judiciary Special Civil A Guide to the Court Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division Special Civil Part Special Civil is a court of limited jurisdiction in which you may sue a person or business
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Gosselin v. Shepherd, 2010 BCSC 755 April Gosselin Date: 20100527 Docket: S104306 Registry: New Westminster Plaintiff Mark Shepherd and Dr.
More informationSalomon v Katos 2013 NY Slip Op 31931(U) July 11, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 11836/2011 Judge: Robert J. McDonald Republished from New
Salomon v Katos 2013 NY Slip Op 31931(U) July 11, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 11836/2011 Judge: Robert J. McDonald Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service.
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Sheffey v. Flowers, 2013-Ohio-1349.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98860 NORMA SHEFFEY, ET AL. vs. PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES ERIC
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS CLYDE EVERETT, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 15, 2010 v No. 287640 Lapeer Circuit Court AUTO OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, LC No. 06-037406-NF Defendant-Appellant.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ROBERT MARKLEY, SR., as Personal Representative of the Estate of SALLY MARKLEY, FOR PUBLICATION February 7, 2003 9:00 a.m. Plaintiff-Appellee, v No. 230056 Branch Circuit
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE October 16, 2018 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE October 16, 2018 Session 12/19/2018 SHAWN T. SLAUGHTER V. GROVER T. MILLS ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County No. 11-C-434 Jeff Hollingsworth,
More information