Levesque v. Levesque, (2001) 151 O.A.C. 227 (CA)

JudgeLabrosse, Weiler and Charron, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ontario)
Case DateNovember 06, 2001
JurisdictionOntario
Citations(2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (CA)

Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] O.A.C. TBEd. NO.050

Luc Levesque (appellant/plaintiff) v. Berthier Levesque (respondent/defendant)

(C29273)

Indexed As: Levesque v. Levesque

Ontario Court of Appeal

Labrosse, Weiler and Charron, JJ.A.

November 15, 2001.

Summary:

The plaintiff was injured in a collision on a gravel cottage road between a four-wheel all-terrain vehicle driven by him and a pickup truck driven by his father. The plaintiff suffered a permanent and disabling injury to his knee. A jury found the plaintiff 100% responsible for the accident and dismissed his action against his father. The plaintiff appealed, and the father cross-appealed the jury's assessment of damages.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal. The jury's verdict on the issue of liability was unreasonable in light of the evidence. The court ordered a new trial on this issue alone.

Torts - Topic 408

Negligence - Motor vehicle - Rules of the road - Driving to left of centre - The plaintiff was injured in a collision on a gravel cottage road between a four-wheel all-terrain vehicle driven by him and a pickup truck driven by his father - A jury found the plaintiff 100% responsible for the accident and dismissed his action against his father - The plaintiff appealed - The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal - The jury's verdict on the issue of liability was unreasonable in light of the evidence of all witnesses that the father was driving in a manner that did not leave one-half of the road clear for the plaintiff's vehicle - The court opined that the evidence was capable of supporting a finding of contributory negligence, and ordered a new trial on the liability issue alone.

Torts - Topic 446

Negligence - Motor vehicle - Rules of the road - Where highway less than two lanes - [See Torts - Topic 408 ].

Torts - Topic 6610

Defences - Contributory negligence - Particular cases - Motor vehicle accidents - [See Torts - Topic 408 ].

Cases Noticed:

Deshane et al. v. Deere & Co. (1993), 65 O.A.C. 275; 15 O.R.(3d) 225 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

Graham v. Hodgkinson (1983), 40 O.R.(2d) 697 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Counsel:

Paul Rouleau and Michelle Vaillancourt, for the appellant;

Michael O'Neill, for the respondent.

This appeal and cross-appeal were heard on November 6, 2001, by Labrosse, Weiler and Charron, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. Charron, J.A., delivered the following decision for the court on November 15, 2001.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Carwardine v. 511825 Ont. Ltd., (2003) 171 O.A.C. 119 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • February 3, 2003
    ...Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 298; 251 N.R. 63; 130 O.A.C. 201; 183 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 46]. Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Sparks v. Thompson, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 618; 1 N.R. 387; 6 N.S.R.(2d) 481; 46 D.L.R.(3d) 225, refd to. [para. 46]. Thomas ......
  • Top 5 Civil Appeals From The Court Of Appeal (February 2013)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • February 25, 2013
    ...in breach of that provision and an accident occurs, he is held to be prima facie negligent. As was explained in Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227, the driver bears the onus of explaining that the accident could not have been avoided by the exercise of reasonable Laskin J.A. clarif......
  • El Dali v. Panjalingam, 2013 ONCA 24
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • November 28, 2012
    ...v. Vancouver-Fraser Park Dist., [1975] 2 S.C.R. 831; 3 N.R. 326; 51 D.L.R.(3d) 416, refd to. [para. 16]. Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Graham v. Hodgkinson (1983), 40 O.R.(2d) 697 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Rydzik v. Edwards (1982), 38 O.R.(2d) 486 (H......
  • Bailey v. Jang, 2011 BCCA 146
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • March 24, 2011
    ...[23] The appellant relies on Melgarejo-Gomez v. Sidhu , 2002 BCCA 19 and Levesque v. Levesque, (15 November 2001), C29273 (Ont. C.A.), 151 O.A.C. 227, as examples of an appellate court setting aside a jury award. It my view, neither case assists the appellant. [24] In Melgarejo-Gomez a pede......
3 cases
  • Carwardine v. 511825 Ont. Ltd., (2003) 171 O.A.C. 119 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • February 3, 2003
    ...Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 298; 251 N.R. 63; 130 O.A.C. 201; 183 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 46]. Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Sparks v. Thompson, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 618; 1 N.R. 387; 6 N.S.R.(2d) 481; 46 D.L.R.(3d) 225, refd to. [para. 46]. Thomas ......
  • El Dali v. Panjalingam, 2013 ONCA 24
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • November 28, 2012
    ...v. Vancouver-Fraser Park Dist., [1975] 2 S.C.R. 831; 3 N.R. 326; 51 D.L.R.(3d) 416, refd to. [para. 16]. Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Graham v. Hodgkinson (1983), 40 O.R.(2d) 697 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Rydzik v. Edwards (1982), 38 O.R.(2d) 486 (H......
  • Bailey v. Jang, 2011 BCCA 146
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • March 24, 2011
    ...[23] The appellant relies on Melgarejo-Gomez v. Sidhu , 2002 BCCA 19 and Levesque v. Levesque, (15 November 2001), C29273 (Ont. C.A.), 151 O.A.C. 227, as examples of an appellate court setting aside a jury award. It my view, neither case assists the appellant. [24] In Melgarejo-Gomez a pede......
1 firm's commentaries
  • Top 5 Civil Appeals From The Court Of Appeal (February 2013)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • February 25, 2013
    ...in breach of that provision and an accident occurs, he is held to be prima facie negligent. As was explained in Levesque v. Levesque (2001), 151 O.A.C. 227, the driver bears the onus of explaining that the accident could not have been avoided by the exercise of reasonable Laskin J.A. clarif......

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