Hare v. Onofrychuk, (1999) 252 A.R. 279 (ProvCt)

JudgeJacobson, P.C.J.
CourtProvincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
Case DateOctober 08, 1999
Citations(1999), 252 A.R. 279 (ProvCt)

Hare v. Onofrychuk (1999), 252 A.R. 279 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] A.R. TBEd. NO.044

David Hare (plaintiff) v. Darryl Onofrychuk and Kaylene Onofrychuk

(defendants)

Indexed As: Hare v. Onofrychuk

Alberta Provincial Court

Jacobson, P.C.J.

October 8, 1999.

Summary:

The plaintiff was bit on the cheek by the defendants' dog. The plaintiff sued the de­fendants. The quantum of damages was agreed upon.

The Alberta Provincial Court held that the male defendant was liable in negligence and under the Occupiers' Liability Act.

Torts - Topic 251

Negligence - Animals - Duty of possessor of domestic animals - Onofrychuk invited Hare into his backyard to see his new puppy - Onofrychuk's other dog, Boomer, reacted hostilely towards Hare - Ono­frychuk, who was standing between Hare and Boomer, told Boomer to go back twice - He also took Boomer by the collar and compelled him to sit, but did not continue to hold onto the collar - Hare bent down to pet the puppy and asked if Boomer was "okay with us" - Onofrychuk said that he was - Boomer growled - Hare stood up - Boomer lunged forward and bit Hare on the cheek - Hare sued Onofrychuk and his wife - The Alberta Provincial Court held that Onofrychuk was negligent in the circumstances for failing to control Boomer and keep him away from Hare - Further, Onofrychuk was liable under the Occu­piers' Liability Act for failure to ensure Hare's safety.

Torts - Topic 261

Negligence - Animals - Duty to control - [See Torts - Topic 251 ].

Torts - Topic 3575

Occupiers' liability or negligence for dan­gerous premises - Negligence of occupier -Animals - [See Torts - Topic 251 ].

Cases Noticed:

Caine Fur Farms Ltd. v. Kokolsky, [1963] S.C.R. 315, refd to. [para. 31].

Bates v. Horkoff et al. (1991), 119 A.R. 270 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Acheson v. Dory (1993), 138 A.R. 241 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Lay v. Jaffary (1995), 168 A.R. 360 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Gulash v. Meier (1997), 207 A.R. 202 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Alchimowicz v. Schram et al. (1999), 116 O.A.C. 287 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

Wade v. Canadian National Railway, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 1064; 17 N.R. 378; 22 N.S.R.(2d) 540; 31 A.P.R. 540; 80 D.L.R.(3d) 214, refd to. [para. 31].

Nasser v. Rumford and Rumford (1977), 7 A.R. 459; 5 Alta. L.R.(2d) 84; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 208 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Kirk v. Trerise et al., [1981] 4 W.W.R. 677 (B.C.C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1981), 39 N.R. 538 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 32].

Ouellet v. Cloutier, [1947] S.C.R. 521, refd to. [para. 49].

Lorenz v. Ed-Mon Developments Ltd. (1991), 118 A.R. 201; 79 Alta. L.R.(2d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

Fardon v. Harcourt-Rivington (1932), 146 L.T. 391; 48 T.L.R. 215 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 56].

Draper v. Hodder, [1972] 2 All E.R. 210; [1972] 2 Q.B. 556 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Searle v. Wallbank, [1947] 1 All E.R. 12 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 58].

Ellis v. Johnstone, [1963] 1 All E.R. 286 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

Sgro v. Verbeek (1980), 28 O.R.(2d) 712; 111 D.L.R.(3d) 479 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 61].

Gill v. MacDonald et al. (1977), 14 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 438; 33 A.P.R. 438; 2 C.C.L.T. 249 (P.E.I.S.C.), refd to. [para. 62].

Statutes Noticed:

Occupiers' Liability Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. O-3, sect. 5, sect. 6, sect. 7, sect. 8, sect. 9 [para. 43].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Ames, Janet, Occupiers Liability, in Rainaldi, Linda A., Remedies in Tort (1987), vol. 3, c. 18, pp. 18.21 #1 [para. 44]; 18.22.1 #4 [para. 45]; 18.24 #6 [para. 46]; 18.79 #76 [para. 47].

Rainaldi, Linda A., Remedies in Tort (1987), vol. 3, c. 18, pp. 18.21 #1 [para. 44]; 18.22.1 #4 [para. 45]; 18.24 #6 [para. 46]; 18.79 #76 [para. 47].

Counsel:

Neil Dobson, for the plaintiff;

Jeff Weidman, for the defendants.

This action was heard by Jacobson, P.C.J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who deliv­ered the following judgment on October 8, 1999.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Hunter v. Anderson, [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1037 (SC)
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 23, 2010
    ...that the defendant's breach caused the plaintiff's injury, and that the plaintiff suffered damage. See Hare v. Onofrychuk, 1999 ABPC 93, 252 A.R. 279 at para. 44; Eric Wagner , Annotated British Columbia Occupiers Liability Act 2010, at p. B-4. In this case the defendant concedes that she o......
1 cases
  • Hunter v. Anderson, [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1037 (SC)
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 23, 2010
    ...that the defendant's breach caused the plaintiff's injury, and that the plaintiff suffered damage. See Hare v. Onofrychuk, 1999 ABPC 93, 252 A.R. 279 at para. 44; Eric Wagner , Annotated British Columbia Occupiers Liability Act 2010, at p. B-4. In this case the defendant concedes that she o......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT