Leggat Estate v. Leggat, (2003) 169 O.A.C. 133 (CA)

• Judge: Doherty, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: Monday October 07, 2002
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (2003), 169 O.A.C. 133 (CA)

Leggat Estate v. Leggat (2003), 169 O.A.C. 133 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] O.A.C. TBEd. MR.018

Paul Stacey Dixon and Hendrik Keesmaat, The Executors of the Estate of the Late Bertram Leggat (plaintiffs/respondents) v. Douglas Leggat and Donald Leggat (defendant/appellant)

(C36237)

Robert J. Lishman, Marlene Lishman, James Lishman and Bradley Lishman (plaintiffs/respondents) v. Donald Leggat and Douglas Leggat (defendant/appellant)

(C36236)

Indexed As: Leggat Estate v. Leggat

Ontario Court of Appeal

Doherty, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A.

March 6, 2003.

Summary:

Douglas Leggat gave his brother Donald permission to use his motorboat to take their cousin Bertram and their friend Robert across a lake. It was dark and wet when Donald and the two others set out. Donald made a navigational error and the boat smashed into a small rocky island. Bertram was killed and Robert was seriously injured. Bertram's estate and Robert and his dependants brought actions for damages against Donald and Douglas.

The Ontario Superior Court, in a decision reported at [2001] O.T.C. 225, found Donald liable as the driver of the boat. The court also found that the provisions of the Canada Shipping Act imposed liability on Douglas as the owner of the boat. Douglas appealed from that finding.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and returned the issue of Douglas's liability for a new trial.

Shipping and Navigation - Topic 450

Ships - Ownership and control - Liability of owner - Negligence of operator - Douglas Leggat gave his brother Donald permission to use his motorboat to take their cousin Bertram and their friend Robert across a lake - It was dark and wet when Donald and the two others set out - Donald made a navigational error and the boat smashed into a small rocky island - Bertram was killed and Robert was injured - Bertram's estate and Robert and his dependants sued Donald and Douglas for damages - The trial judge found Donald liable as the driver of the boat - The trial judge also found that the provisions of the Canada Shipping Act imposed liability on Douglas as the owner of the boat - The trial judge relied primarily on s. 566 of the Act, but also referred to ss. 567 and 571 and rule 2 of the Collision Regulations - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in finding Douglas liable on the basis that he did - The provisions of the Act did not impose a statutory liability on an owner for the fault of his vessel in the circumstances of this case.

Cases Noticed:

Ship Rhone v. Ship Peter A.B. Widener et al., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 497; 148 N.R. 349, refd to. [para. 24].

Stein Estate v. Ship Kathy K, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802; 6 N.R. 359; 62 D.L.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 33].

Miida Electronics Inc. v. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd. and ITO-International Terminal Operators Ltd., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752; 68 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 45].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Shipping Act - see Shipping Act.

Collision Regulations - see Shipping Act Regulations (Can.).

Shipping Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-9, sect. 391 [para. 40]; sect. 566 [para. 31]; sect. 567 [para. 34]; sect. 571 [para. 36]; sect. 575(1) [para. 40].

Shipping Act Regulations (Can.), Collision Regulations, rule 2 [para. 38].

Counsel:

Patrick J. Monaghan, for the appellant;

John F. Evans, Q.C., for the respondents, Dixon and Keesmaat;

P. Sweeney and James A. Scarfone, for the respondents, Lishman.

This appeal was heard on October 7, 2002, before Doherty, Laskin and Goudge, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Goudge, J.A., and was released on March 6, 2003.