Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality)

JurisdictionAlberta
CourtProvincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
JudgeHonourable D.G. Redman
Citation2020 ABPC 53
Docket NumberP1802600404
Date05 March 2020

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
5 practice notes
  • New Pyke Decision May Create Uncertainty For Municipal Statutory Defences
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 20 Abril 2022
    ...Act"). 2. See Ellis v City of Lethbridge, 2020 ABQB 783; Shanks v Calgary (City), 2003 ABQB 56; Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality),2020 ABPC 53. 3. Pyke v Calgary (City), 2022 ABQB 198 4. Limitations Act, RSA 2000, c L-12 ("Limitations Act"). * * * Brownlee LLP is a member of the Cana......
  • R v CG
    • Canada
    • Court of King's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 21 Octubre 2022
    ...s 718.04 and s 718.201, and did not have the benefit of the reasons of Friesen. [62] The Defence relies significantly on R v Saddleback, 2020 ABPC 53, as that is case is post-Friesen. That case also involved sexual assault on two occasions of an intimate partner with an escalating degree of......
  • Pyke v Calgary (City)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 8 Marzo 2022
    ...under MGA s 532 for keeping a sidewalk in a reasonable state of repair. The City also relied on Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 53 where ACJ Redman concluded that MGA s 533 relieved a municipality for liability under MGA s 532 for failing to keep a curb in a reasonable s......
  • Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality)
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • 15 Mayo 2020
    ...and that the Plaintiffs had failed to mitigate those damages. [3] In my decision reported as Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 53, I dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for the reasons contained [4] The issue before me now is costs: the Defendant seeks costs; the Plaintiff sub......
  • Get Started for Free
3 cases
  • Pyke v Calgary (City), 2022 ABQB 198
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 8 Marzo 2022
    ...under MGA s 532 for keeping a sidewalk in a reasonable state of repair. The City also relied on Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 53 where ACJ Redman concluded that MGA s 533 relieved a municipality for liability under MGA s 532 for failing to keep a curb in a reasonable s......
  • Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 91
    • Canada
    • Provincial Court of Alberta (Canada)
    • 15 Mayo 2020
    ...and that the Plaintiffs had failed to mitigate those damages. [3] In my decision reported as Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 53, I dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for the reasons contained [4] The issue before me now is costs: the Defendant seeks costs; the Plaintiff sub......
  • R v CG, 2022 ABKB 696
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 21 Octubre 2022
    ...reasons of Friesen. [62]           The Defence relies significantly on R v Saddleback, 2020 ABPC 53, as that is case is post-Friesen. That case also involved sexual assault on two occasions of an intimate partner with an escalating degree of......
2 firm's commentaries
  • New Pyke Decision May Create Uncertainty For Municipal Statutory Defences
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 20 Abril 2022
    ...Act"). 2. See Ellis v City of Lethbridge, 2020 ABQB 783; Shanks v Calgary (City), 2003 ABQB 56; Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality),2020 ABPC 53. 3. Pyke v Calgary (City), 2022 ABQB 198 4. Limitations Act, RSA 2000, c L-12 ("Limitations Act"). * * * Brownlee LLP is a member of the Cana......
  • Damaged Curbs Do Not Attract Automatic Liability
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 29 Junio 2022
    ...property when water flowed over a sunken roadside curb during heavy rainfall in June 2017. In Pulkinen v Crowsnest Pass (Municipality), 2020 ABPC 53, the plaintiff alleged that a sunken curb's failure to block storm water runoff directly contributed to soil erosion in his home's backyard. I......