Ratych v. Bloomer, (1990) 107 N.R. 335 (SCC)

• Judge: Dickson, C.J.C., Lamer, Wilson, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: January 30, 1990
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1990), 107 N.R. 335 (SCC);[1990] SCJ No 37 (QL);JE 90-817;EYB 1990-67539;69 DLR (4th) 25;30 CCEL 161;[1990] RRA 651;73 OR (2d) 448;1990 CanLII 97 (SCC);39 OAC 103;20 ACWS (3d) 946;[1990] ACS no 37;[1990] CarswellOnt 644;107 NR 335;[1990] 1 SCR 940;3 CCLT (2d) 1

Ratych v. Bloomer (1990), 107 N.R. 335 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Wavell Bloomer (appellant) v. Ratych (respondent)

(21152)

Indexed As: Ratych v. Bloomer

Supreme Court of Canada

Dickson, C.J.C., Lamer, Wilson, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ.

May 3, 1990.

Summary:

Ratych, a police officer, was injured when his police cruiser was involved in a motor vehicle accident involving an impaired driver, Bloomer. The accident was solely caused by Bloomer's negligence. Ratych was unable to work for several months during which time he was on sick leave. He continued to be paid pursuant to the terms of his collective agreement and did not lose any accumulated sick leave credits. Ratych commenced an action against Bloomer, seeking $7987.38 special damages, which represented his wages during the period he was unable to work.

The Ontario High Court of Justice, per Ewashchuk, J., in a decision reported 60 O.R.(2d) 181, allowed the action and awarded the amount sought. The judge considered himself bound by the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Boarelli v. Flannigan (1973), 36 D.L.R.(3d) 4. Bloomer appealed.

The Ontario Divisional Court, in a brief endorsement, reported 63 O.R.(2d) 544, dismissed the appeal on the same ground. Bloomer applied for leave to appeal.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal without written reasons. Bloomer appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada, per McLachlin, J. (Lamer, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé and Sopinka, JJ., concurring), allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment for damages for loss of earnings. Cory, J., dissenting (Dickson, C.J.C., Wilson and Gonthier, JJ., concurring) opined that the appeal should be dismissed.

Damages - Topic 1732

Deductions for payments or assistance by third parties - Contractually - From employer - Wages - General - [See both Damages - Topic 1733].

Damages - Topic 1733

Deductions for payments or assistance by third parties - Contractually - From employer - Sick leave benefits - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "as a general rule, wage benefits paid while a plaintiff is unable to work must be brought into account and deducted from the claim for lost earnings. An exception to this rule may lie where the court is satisfied that the employer or fund which paid the wage benefits is entitled to be reimbursed for them on the principle of subrogation ..." - The court thereafter gave examples of exceptions and how a court should deal with them - See paragraph 68.

Damages - Topic 1733

Deductions for payments or assistance by third parties - Contractually - From employer - Sick leave benefits - A police officer was injured when his police cruiser was involved in an accident caused by an impaired driver - The officer was unable to work for several months during which time he was paid sick leave benefits by his employer under a collective agreement and did not lose any accumulated sick leave credits - The officer sued the impaired driver for lost wages during the period he was unable to work - The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the officer's claim where the officer failed to establish a loss compensable in damages - See paragraphs 1 to 70.

Damages - Topic 1736

Deductions for payments or assistance by third parties - Contractually - From employer - Wages payable pursuant to a collective agreement - [See both Damages - Topic 1733].

Cases Noticed:

Boarelli v. Flannigan (1973), 36 D.L.R.(3d) 4 (Ont. C.A.), not folld. [paras. 6, 8, 10, 30, 52, 79, 85, 92].

Chan v. Butcher, [1984] 4 W.W.R. 363 (B.C.C.A.), not folld. [paras. 8, 10, 24, 35, 85, 90].

Lavigne v. Doucet (1976), 14 N.B.R.(2d) 700; 15 A.P.R. 700, consd. [paras. 8, 34, 40, 89].

Hussain v. New Taplow Paper Mills Ltd., [1988] 1 All E.R. 541; 86 N.R. 308 (H.L.), consd. [paras. 8, 10, 24, 25, 84, 86, 87, 91, 94, 101].

Graham v. Baker, [1961] 106 C.L.R. 340 (H.C.), consd. [paras. 8, 26].

Andrews v. Grand and Toy (Alberta) Ltd., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229; 19 N.R. 50; 8 A.R. 182; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 557; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 452; 3 C.C.L.T. 225, refd to. [paras. 13-15].

Thornton v. Board of School Trustees of School District No. 57, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 267; 19 N.R. 552; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 607; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 480; 3 C.C.L.T. 257, consd. [paras. 13-15, 57, 61, 68].

Teno et al. v. Arnold, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 287; 19 N.R. 1; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 609; 3 C.C.L.T. 372, consd. [paras. 13-15, 57, 61, 68].

Phillips v. South Western Railway Co. (1879), 4 Q.B.D. 406 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

Browning v. War Office, [1962] 3 All E.R. 1089, consd. [paras. 18, 21, 29, 82, 83, 89].

Bradburn v. Great Western Rail. Co., [1874-1880] All E.R. 195, (Ex. Div.), consd. [paras. 20, 28, 36, 80-86, 104].

Parry v. Cleaver, [1969] 1 All E.R. 555 (H.L.), consd. [paras. 22, 23, 24, 25, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 64, 65, 83, 85, 87, 88, 90].

Tubb v. Lief, [1932] 3 W.W.R. 245 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 28, 85].

Parsons v. Saunders (1963), 39 D.L.R.(2d) 190 (N.S.S.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Dell v. Vermette (1963), 67 D.L.R.(2d) 101 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Dell v. Vermette (1963), 42 D.L.R.(2d) 326 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

Woodworth v. Farmer (1963), 39 D.L.R.(2d) 179 (N.S.T.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Rados v. Neumann, [1971] 2 O.R. 269 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Massia v. Allen, [1973] 1 O.R. 419 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 29].

Brazier v. Humphreys (1973), 38 D.L.R.(3d) 201 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

McCready v. Munroe (1965), 55 D.L.R.(2d), refd to. [para. 29].

Menhennet v. Schoenholz, [1971] 3 O.R. 355 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 29, 30, 91, 92].

Canadian Pacific Ltd. v. Gill, [1973] S.C.R. 654, consd. [paras. 31, 32, 85, 88].

Guy v. Trizec Equities Ltd., [1979] 2 S.C.R. 756; 27 N.R. 301, consd. [paras. 32, 33, 85, 88].

Dennis v. London Passenger Transport Board, [1948] 1 All E.R. 779, refd to. [para. 57].

Myers v. Hoffman (1955), 1 D.L.R.(2d) 272 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 57].

Rawson v. Kasman (1956), 3 D.L.R.(2d) 376 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Shearman v. Folland, [1950] 1 All E.R. 976 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 81].

Dawson v. Sawatzky, [1946] 1 W.W.R. 33 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 85].

Bourgeois v. Tzrop (1957), 9 D.L.R.(2d) 214 (N.B.S.C.A.D.), refd to. [para. 85].

Re Welland Forge Ltd. (1970), 21 L.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 94].

Statutes Noticed:

Family Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 152, sect. 60 [para. 58].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Brown, Donald J.M., and David M. Beatty, Canadian Labour Arbitration (1977), p. 467 [para. 94].

Cooper-Stephenson, Kenneth D., and Iwan B. Saunders, Personal Injury Damages in Canada (1981), pp. 469-474 [para. 80]; 479 [para. 46]; 481 [paras. 49, 50]; 482 [para. 50]; 484, 485 [para. 58].

Goldsmith, Daena A., A Survey of the Collateral Source Rule: The Effects of Reform and Impact on Multistate Litigation (1988), 53 Journal of Air Law and Commerce 799, generally [para. 27].

McLachlin, B.M., What Price Disability? A Perspective on the Law of Damages for Personal Injury (1981), 59 Can. Bar Rev. 2, p. 44 [para. 80].

New York (State), Governor's Advisory Commission on Liability Insurance, Insuring Our Future: Report of the Governor's Advisory Commission on Liability Insurance (1986), generally [paras. 27, 102].

Ontario, Law Reform Commission, Report on Compensation for Personal Injuries and Death (1987), p. 189 [paras. 60, 102].

Ontario, Inquiry into Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation in Ontario, Report of Inquiry into Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation in Ontario (Coulter Commission) (1988), p. 438 [para. 52].

Palmer, Earl E., Collective Agreement Arbitration in Canada (2nd Ed. 1983), pp. 670, 671 [para. 94].

Sanderson, John P., The Art of Collective Bargaining (1979), p. 1 [para. 99].

United Kingdom, Report of the Royal Commission on Civil Liability and Compensation for Personal Injury (1978), Cmnd. 7054, I-III, generally [paras. 50, 102].

United States of America, Attorney General, Report of the Tort Policy Working Group on the Causes, Extent and Policy Implications of the Current Crisis in Insurance Availability and Affordability (1986), generally [paras. 27, 102].

Counsel:

James M. Flaherty and J.M. Chadwick, for the appellant;

James E. Lewis, Q.C., for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Gilbert, Wright & Flaherty, Toronto, Ontario, for the appellant;

Keyser, Mason, Ball & Lewis, Mississauga, Ontario, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on January 30, 1990, before Dickson, C.J.C., Lamer, Wilson, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and McLachlin, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. The judgment of the Court was rendered in both official languages on May 3, 1990, including the following opinions:

McLachlin, J. (Lamer, La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé and Sopinka, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 74;

Cory, J., dissenting (Dickson, C.J.C, Wilson and Gonthier, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 75 to 105.