Ivan v. Aoco Ltd., (1980) 5 Sask.R. 78 (CA)

JudgeWoods, Brownridge and Hall, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
Case DateWednesday September 03, 1980
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations(1980), 5 Sask.R. 78 (CA)

Ivan v. Aoco Ltd. (1980), 5 Sask.R. 78 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Ivan v. Aoco Ltd.

(No. 7282)

Indexed As: Ivan v. Aoco Ltd.

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Woods, Brownridge and Hall, JJ.A.

September 3, 1980.

Summary:

This case arose out of an action for damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff purchased a pair of safety glasses manufactured by the defendant. The glasses broke when struck by a nail and the plaintiff's eye was injured.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held the manufacturer liable to the plaintiff for failure to provide a warning of the circumstances when the glasses would not provide protection. The judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench is reported at 1 Sask.R. 198. The defendant manufacturer appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the plaintiff's action. The Court of Appeal stated that the safety glasses were not items of a hazardous nature and the manufacturer was not required to provide a warning to the plaintiff.

Torts - Topic 4335

Suppliers of goods - Products liability - Negligence - Manufacturers - Duty to warn consumer respecting danger - The plaintiff bought a pair of safety glasses manufactured by the defendant - The glasses broke when struck by a nail and the plaintiff's eye was injured - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiff's action - The Court of Appeal stated that because the safety glasses were not items of a hazardous nature there was no duty on the manufacturer to provide a warning - See paragraph 7.

Cases Noticed:

Dunsmore v. Deshield et al., 80 D.L.R.(3d) 386, folld. [para. 6].

Lambert v. Lastoplex Chemicals Co. Limited and Barwood Sales (Ontario) Limited, [1972] S.C.R. 569, dist. [para. 7].

Counsel:

Gary G.W. Semenchuk, for the appellant;

M.D. Wentzell, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by WOODS, BROWNRIDGE and HALL, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by HALL, J.A., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on September 3, 1980.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
1 practice notes
  • Greenwood v. Dietz et al., (2005) 261 Sask.R. 25 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • January 10, 2005
    ...Moosburger v. Bork et al. (1990), 85 Sask.R. 178 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 60]. Ivan v. Aoco Ltd. (1980), 1 Sask. R. 198 (Q.B.), revd. (1980), 5 Sask.R. 78 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Ouellet v. Uranium City Hotel Ltd. and Mercredi (1979), 5 Sask.R. 421, refd to. [para. 65]. Leitz v. Saskatoon Dr......
1 cases
  • Greenwood v. Dietz et al., (2005) 261 Sask.R. 25 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • January 10, 2005
    ...Moosburger v. Bork et al. (1990), 85 Sask.R. 178 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 60]. Ivan v. Aoco Ltd. (1980), 1 Sask. R. 198 (Q.B.), revd. (1980), 5 Sask.R. 78 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Ouellet v. Uranium City Hotel Ltd. and Mercredi (1979), 5 Sask.R. 421, refd to. [para. 65]. Leitz v. Saskatoon Dr......