Marche v. Empire Co. and Sobeys Inc.,

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: Roscoe, Flinn and Oland, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Citation: (2001), 193 N.S.R.(2d) 132 (CA),2001 NSCA 59
• Date: 06 April 2001

Marche v. Empire Co. (2001), 193 N.S.R.(2d) 132 (CA);

 602 A.P.R. 132

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.028

Empire Company Limited and Sobeys Inc. (appellants) v. Thora Marche (respondent)

(C.A. No. 164671; 2001 NSCA 59)

Indexed As: Marche v. Empire Co. and Sobeys Inc.

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Roscoe, Flinn and Oland, JJ.A.

April 6, 2001.

Summary:

The 68 year old plaintiff slipped on a grape in the produce section of the de­fendants' store, injuring her tailbone and lower back. The plaintiff brought an action for damages on the basis of occupiers' li­ability.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported 183 N.S.R.(2d) 224; 568 A.P.R. 224, allowed the action. The de­fendants' system for periodically detecting and removing unusual dangers was inade­quate. Reasonable care required a more proactive policy for preventing the danger, rather than just responding to the danger after it occurred. The defendants appealed, submitting that the trial judge imposed the wrong standard of care and misapprehended the evidence.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dis­missed the appeal. The trial judge did not apply the wrong standard and made no palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts.

Torts - Topic 3577

Occupiers' liability or negligence for dan­gerous premises - Negligence of occupier -Floors - The 68 year old plaintiff slipped on a grape in the produce section of a grocery store, injuring her tailbone and lower back - The trial judge found the store liable - A grape on the floor consti­tuted an unusual danger - The store's system of promptly detecting and removing produce on the floor was inadequate - Reasonable care required more than periodic inspection in the produce depart­ment, where grapes and other produce frequently fell to the floor - What was adequate in other departments, where spillage was less frequent, was not neces­sarily adequate in the produce department -The trial judge noted that the store could have, inter alia, posted a warning of the danger, reduced the risk by altering the way the grapes were displayed or pack­aged, or installed mats in high spillage areas in the produce department - Rea­sonable care required a more proactive system to reduce the risk rather than just reacting to it - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal affirmed the decision - The trial judge did not apply the wrong standard and made no palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts.

Torts - Topic 3705

Occupiers' liability or negligence for dan­gerous premises - Invitees - Liability of particular occupiers (incl. duty and standard of care) - Retail business - [See Torts - Topic 3577 ].

Cases Noticed:

Indermaur v. Dames (1866), L.R. 1 C.P. 274, refd to. [para. 13].

Campbell v. Royal Bank of Canada, [1964] S.C.R. 85, refd to. [para. 13].

Smith v. Provincial Motors Ltd. (1962), 32 D.L.R.(2d) 405 (N.S.S.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

Fiddes v. Rayner Construction Ltd. (1963), 45 D.L.R.(2d) 367 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

Ingles v. Tutkaluk Construction Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 298; 251 N.R. 63; 130 O.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 18].

Canada (Attorney General) v. Dingle et al. (2000), 181 N.S.R.(2d) 302; 560 A.P.R. 302 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Stein Estate v. Ship Kathy K, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802; 6 N.R. 359, refd to. [para. 19].

Toneguzzo-Norvell et al. v. Savein and Burnaby Hospital, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 114; 162 N.R. 161; 38 B.C.A.C. 193; 62 W.A.C. 193, refd to. [para. 19].

Empire Co. v. Sheppard (2001), 198 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 53; 595 A.P.R. 53 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Beaman v. Canada Safeway Ltd. (1993), 115 Sask.R. 100 (Q.B.), affd. (1994), 123 Sask.R. 244; 74 W.A.C. 244 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Vyas v. Board of Education of Colchester-East Hants District (1989), 94 N.S.R.(2d) 350; 247 A.P.R. 350 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Bennett v. Dominion Stores Ltd. (1961), 30 D.L.R.(2d) 266 (N.S.T.D.), refd to. [para. 24].

Kelly v. Loblaws Inc., [1999] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 28 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 24].

Garofalo v. Canada Safeway Ltd. (1998), 66 O.T.C. 241 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 25].

Evans v. Pattison (Jim) Industries Ltd., [2000] B.C.T.C. 400 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 25].

Kay v. Sobeys Inc. (1998), 205 N.B.R.(2d) 74; 523 A.P.R. 74 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 25].

Counsel:

David Miller, Q.C., Nancy Murray and Dennise Mack, for the appellants;

William P. Burchell, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on February 2, 2001, before Roscoe, Flinn and Oland, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.

On April 6, 2001, Oland, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.