Day & Ross Inc. v. Randall et al., [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 67 (TD)

• Judge: McLellan, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: Tuesday April 11, 2000
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 67 (TD)

Day & Ross Inc. v. Randall, [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 67 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[English language version only]

[Version en langue anglaise seulement]

Temp. Cite: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. AP.033

Renvoi temp.: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. AP.033

Day & Ross Inc. (plaintiff) v. John Randall and Jöel Gagnon in his capacity as liquidator of the Estate of Jean-Claude Gagnon, deceased (defendants)

(W/C/25/98)

Indexed As: Day & Ross Inc. v. Randall et al.

Répertorié: Day & Ross Inc. v. Randall et al.

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Saint John

McLellan, J.

April 11, 2000.

Summary:

Résumé:

Two passenger vehicles and a tractor-trailer owned by Day & Ross Inc. were involved in a fatal accident with a moose. Day & Ross sued the other two drivers for the cost of repairs to the tractor-trailer.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, found that the acci­dent was solely caused by the moose and dismissed the action.

Torts - Topic 253

Negligence - Animals - On highway - Moose - A minivan struck a moose and pushed it into the path of an oncoming car - The car struck the moose and crossed the centre line of the highway, where the car struck an oncoming tractor-trailer owned by Day & Ross Inc. - Day & Ross sued the other two drivers for the cost of repairs to the tractor-trailer - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, found that the accident was solely caused by the moose and dismissed the action.

Torts - Topic 464

Negligence - Motor vehicle - Speed - Where reduced speed required - Pedes­trians and animals - A minivan was travelling at 105 km/h in a 90 km/h zone at night when it struck a moose and pushed it into the path of an oncoming car - The car struck the moose and crossed the centre line of the highway, where the car struck an oncoming tractor-trailer owned by Day & Ross Inc. - Day & Ross sued the other two drivers for the cost of repairs to the tractor-trailer - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that "I am not persuaded that [the driver's] speed in the minivan was the cause of the collision. At any reasonable highway speed [the driver] was in danger of hitting a moose if it came onto a highway in front of him at night" - See paragraph 20.

Torts - Topic 6775

Defences - Inevitable or fortuitous accident - General - [See Torts - Topic 253].

Délits civils - Cote 253

Négligence - Animaux - Sur la route - Orignal - [Voir Torts - Topic 253].

Délits civils - Cote 464

Négligence - Véhicule à moteur - Vitesse - Nécessité de réduire la vitesse - Piétons et animaux - [Voir Torts - Topic 464].

Délits civils - Cote 6775

Moyens de défense - Accident inévitable ou fortuit - Généralités - [Voir Torts - Topic 6775].

Cases Noticed:

Lévesque v. Comeau, [1970] S.C.R. 1010, refd to. [para. 11].

Boutcher and Canada (Attorney General) v. Stewart and Stewart (1989), 99 N.B.R.(2d) 30; 250 A.P.R. 30 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Maksymetz v. Plamondon et al., [1988] 5 W.W.R. 281; 53 Man.R.(2d) 304 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Tabaka v. Greyhound Lines of Canada Ltd. et al. (1999), 252 A.R. 373 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

Counsel:

Howard A. Spalding, Q.C., and Luc C. Marcoux, for the plaintiffs;

Barry R. Morrison, Q.C., and François M. Beaulieu, for the defendant, Gagnon;

Mark A. Canty, for the defendant, Randall.

This matter was heard on March 27 and 28, 2000, by McLellan, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Divi­sion, Judicial District of Saint John, who delivered the following decision on April 11, 2000.