Butler Trucking Co. v. Brydges Estate, (1984) 4 O.A.C. 378 (DC)
|Judge:||Maloney, Griffiths and Gray, JJ.|
|Court:||Superior Court of Justice of Ontario|
|Case Date:||May 31, 1984|
|Citations:||(1984), 4 O.A.C. 378 (DC);1984 CanLII 1863 (ON SC);4 OAC 378;1984 CanLII 1863 (NB QB);46 OR (2d) 686;10 DLR (4th) 275|
Butler Trucking Co. v. Brydges Estate (1984), 4 O.A.C. 378 (DC)
MLB headnote and full text
Butler Trucking Company and Clark v. Brydges Estate and Workers' Compensation Board
Indexed As: Butler Trucking Co. and Clark v. Brydges Estate and Workers' Compensation Board (Ont.)
Ontario Supreme Court
Maloney, Griffiths and Gray, JJ.
June 7, 1984.
Brydges was killed in a motor vehicle collision. Both owners of the vehicles involved were employers under the Workers' Compensation Act and the drivers of the vehicles were acting in the course of their employment at the time of the collision. Brydges' estate, on behalf of members of the Brydges family, commenced an action for damages under s. 60 of the Family Law Reform Act. The defendants in the action applied to the Workers' Compensation Board for a declaration that the action under s. 60 of the Family Law Reform Act was barred by the Workers' Compensation Act. The Workers' Compensation Board decided that the action under s. 60 was not barred by the Workers' Compensation Act. The defendants applied for judicial review.
The Ontario Divisional Court set aside the decision of the board because the board failed to consider the plain meaning of s. 60 of the Family Law Reform Act. The Divisional Court remitted the matter to the board for further consideration.
Torts - Topic 8141
Derivative actions - By family of person injured or killed - The Ontario Divisional Court stated that the action (under s. 60 of the Family Law Reform Act) given to members of a family of a person who has been injured or killed "is purely a derivative action" - see paragraph 11.
Workers' Compensation - Topic 112
Effect of statute on other causes of action - Derivative action by family of employee against an employer covered by the Workers' Compensation Act - The Ontario Divisional Court stated that s. 8(9) of the Workers' Compensation Act took away the derivative action (under s. 60 of the Family Law Reform Act) of the family of an employee covered by the Act who has been injured or killed - See paragraph 14.
Fera et al. v. Uguccioni (1980), 29 O.R.(2d) 65 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 11].
Re Ryder Truck Rentals (Canada) Ltd. and Thompson et al. (1976), 16 O.R.(2d) 260, refd to. [para. 16].
Mason v. Peters et al. (1980), 30 O.R.(2d) 409; 139 D.L.R.(3d) 104, refd to. [para. 18].
Workers' Compensation Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 539, sect. 1(1)(f) [para. 7]; sect. 8(9) [para. 9]; sect. 15 [para. 6].
Family Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 152, sect. 60 [para. 10].
T.G. O'Neill, for the applicants;
K.J. Bennett, for the respondent, Robert S. Brydges, administrator;
Mrs. J. Lax and J. Nemet, for the respondent Workers' Compensation Board.
This application was heard by Maloney, Griffiths and Gray, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court on May 31, 1984. The decision of the Court was delivered orally by Griffiths, J., and was released on June 7, 1984.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP