Tucker v. Asleson et al., (1993) 24 B.C.A.C. 253 (CA)
| Judge | McEachern, C.J.B.C., Southin and Proudfoot, JJ.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
| Case Date | April 20, 1993 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253 (CA);1993 CanLII 2782 (BC CA);102 DLR (4th) 518;[1993] 6 WWR 45;78 BCLR (2d) 173;24 BCAC 253;[1993] CarswellBC 94;[1993] BCJ No 837 (QL);44 MVR (2d) 178 |
Tucker v. Asleson (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253 (CA);
40 W.A.C. 253
MLB headnote and full text
The Public Trustee as Guardian Ad Litem on behalf of Brandi Helen Tucker (plaintiff/respondent) v. Wayne Robert Asleson (defendant/appellant) and Her Majesty The Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia, Myra E. Tucker, Peter Gordon Tucker and Middleton Ventures Ltd. (defendants/respondents) and Canadian Home Assurance Company (third party)
(CA013959; CA014019)
Indexed As: Tucker v. Asleson et al.
British Columbia Court of Appeal
McEachern, C.J.B.C., Southin and Proudfoot, JJ.A.
April 20, 1993.
Summary:
The defendant Tucker lost control of her motor vehicle on an icy highway, crossed the centre line and struck an oncoming tractor-trailer driven by the defendant Asleson. Asleson unsuccessfully tried to drive around Tucker's sliding vehicle. Tucker's infant daughter (the plaintiff) was severely injured. The plaintiff brought a negligence action for damages against the defendants Tucker and Asleson and the Province, claiming the latter was negligent for failing to properly sand or salt the highway.
The British Columbia Supreme Court found all three defendants negligent and 1/3 at fault. Asleson and the Province appealed the findings that they were negligent and the amount of damages awarded.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal, McEachern, C.J.B.C., dissenting in part, allowed Asleson's appeal and dismissed the Province's appeal. Accordingly, Tucker was negligent and 1/3 at fault and the Province was negligent and 2/3 at fault. The court refused to vary the damage award. McEachern, C.J.B.C., would have ordered a new trial for the assessment of the plaintiff's damage award for future loss of income.
Crown - Topic 1645
Torts by and against Crown - Actions against Crown - Bars or exclusions - "Policy" decision - An accident occurred on an icy stretch of highway - The plaintiff claimed the Province was negligent for failing to ensure the highway was properly sanded and salted - The Crown had contracted out salting and sanding to an independent contractor - The Province claimed it could not be liable for a policy decision and acted reasonably in relying on the contractor to properly perform his contract - The Province had not provided the contractor with the standards for winter maintenance of the highway and the contractor failed to carry out sanding and salting required on the day of the accident - The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed that the Province was negligent for failing to maintain the highway reasonably at the time and place in question - See paragraphs 59 to 85.
Municipal Law - Topic 1730
Liability of municipalities - Highways - Dangerous highway conditions - Standard of care - Icy patches - [See Crown - Topic 1645 ].
Practice - Topic 8808
Appeals - Duty of appellate court respecting conclusions or interpretation of evidence by trial judge - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that, as a matter of law, it was open to a provincial Court of Appeal to reverse a trial judge's finding that a defendant motor vehicle driver was negligent, where the Court of Appeal would not, on all the evidence, have found the defendant negligent had it been sitting as the trial judge - See paragraphs 22 to 35.
Torts - Topic 379
Negligence - Motor vehicle - Standard of care of driver - Imminent danger, "agony of the moment" or "agony of collision" - The plaintiff driver hit an icy patch, crossed the centre line and unsuccessfully attempted to return to her own lane before colliding with the oncoming defendant tractor-trailer driver - The defendant momentarily turned to the left, then headed for the ditch on the right side - The trial judge found the defendant negligent for failing to immediately slow down rather than taking evasive action - The defendant was travelling at or below the speed limit and had not encountered any ice - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the defendant was not negligent in reacting as he did - It would be to impose a standard of perfection on the defendant to find that he should have anticipated encountering a driver coming towards him out of control and sliding on the wrong side of the road - The court stated that the defendant acted reasonably in his attempt at evasive action - See paragraphs 1 to 58.
Torts - Topic 7420
Joint and concurrent tortfeasors - Contribution between tortfeasors - Settlement by one tortfeasor - Tucker and the Province were both found negligent in an accident injuring the infant plaintiff - The plaintiff settled with Tucker and her insurer - The Province claimed the settlement severed the joint and several liability under s. 4 of the Negligence Act - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that the "right of contribution and indemnity among several concurrent tortfeasors is independent of what the injured person does, if, in fact, damage or loss has been caused by the fault of two or more" - The court stated that the act of releasing Tucker did not affect the right of the Province to claim over against Tucker - The liability of the defendants remained joint and several under s. 4 - See paragraphs 98 to 120.
Cases Noticed:
Gauthier v. R., [1945] S.C.R. 143, refd to. [para. 18].
Lewis v. Todd, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 694; 34 N.R. 1; 115 D.L.R.(3d) 257; 14 C.C.L.T. 294, refd to. [para. 23].
Bruce v. McIntyre, [1955] S.C.R. 251, refd to. [para. 25].
Car and General Insurance Corp. v. Seymour and Maloney, [1956] S.C.R. 322, refd to. [para. 25].
Byers v. Bourbonnais, [1963] S.C.R. 117, refd to. [para. 25].
Dorval v. Bouvier, [1968] S.C.R. 288, refd to. [para. 25].
Hébert v. Fortier, [1970] S.C.R. 772, refd to. [para. 25].
Haase v. Pedro, [1971] S.C.R. 669, refd to. [para. 25].
Freedman v. Côte St. Luc (City), [1972] S.C.R. 216, refd to. [para. 25].
Canadian Pacific Ltd. v. Gill, [1973] S.C.R. 654, refd to. [para. 25].
Gordon v. Trottier, [1974] S.C.R. 158, refd to. [para. 25].
Silburn v. Antagon Construction Co., [1977] 2 S.C.R. 271; 12 N.R. 304, refd to. [para. 25].
Guidolin v. Voyageur Provincial Inc. and Lachance, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 1112; 14 N.R. 495, refd to. [para. 25].
Johnston National Storage v. Mathieson, [1953] 2 D.L.R. 604 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 25].
Provincial Transport Co. v. Dozois and Sansfaçon, [1954] S.C.R. 223, refd to. [para. 25].
Thompson v. Fraser, [1955] S.C.R. 419, refd to. [para. 25].
O'Connor et al. v. Quigley et al., [1958] S.C.R. 156, refd to. [para. 25].
Harrison et al. v. Bourn, [1958] S.C.R. 733, refd to. [para. 25].
Markling v. Ewaniuk, [1968] S.C.R. 776, refd to. [para. 25].
Adams v. Dias, [1968] S.C.R. 931, refd to. [para. 25].
Petijevich v. Law, [1969] S.C.R. 257, refd to. [para. 25].
Chartier v. Larameé, [1969] S.C.R. 771, refd to. [para. 25].
Eid Estate v. Dumas, [1969] S.C.R. 668; 1 N.B.R.(2d) 445, refd to. [para. 25].
Lotholz v. Charlton et al., [1969] S.C.R. 692, refd to. [para. 25].
Ptycia v. Swetlishnoff, [1971] S.C.R. 670, refd to. [para. 25].
McConkey v. Thorn, [1972] S.C.R. 61, refd to. [para. 25].
Hébert v. Lamothe, [1974] S.C.R. 1181, refd to. [para. 25].
Goulais v. Restoule and Maryland Casualty Co., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 365; 2 N.R. 153, refd to. [para. 25].
Paquin v. Lessard et al., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 665; 10 N.R. 620, refd to. [para. 25].
Corothers v. Slobodian and Poupard, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 633; 3 N.R. 185, refd to. [para. 25].
Dominion Trust Co. v. New York Life Insurance Co., [1919] A.C. 254, refd to. [para. 27].
Union Maritime and General Insurance Co. v. Bodnorchuk and Nawakowsky, [1958] S.C.R. 399, refd to. [para. 27].
North British & Mercantile Insurance Co. v. Tourville et al. (1895), 25 S.C.R. 177, refd to. [para. 27].
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. 28].
B.C. Electric Railway Co. v. Farrer, [1955] S.C.R. 757, refd to. [para. 31].
McLuskie v. Sakai (1987), 12 B.C.L.R.(2d) 372 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].
Caldeira v. Gray, [1936] 1 All E.R. 540 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 33].
Kita v. Braig (1992), 17 B.C.A.C. 55; 29 W.A.C. 55; 71 B.C.L.R.(2d) 135 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].
Workmen's Compensation Board v. Greer, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 347; 1 N.R. 99; 7 N.B.R.(2d) 171, refd to. [para. 33].
Kwok v. B.C. Ferry Corp. (1989), 37 B.C.L.R.(2d) 236 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].
Swartz v. Wills, [1935] S.C.R. 628, refd to. [para. 34].
Toronto Railway v. King, [1908] A.C. 260, refd to. [para. 34].
Walker v. Brownlee, [1952] 2 D.L.R. 450 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 34].
Brooks v. Ward and R., [1956] S.C.R. 683, refd to. [para. 37].
Curbello v. Thompson, [1968] S.C.R. 626, refd to. [para. 39].
Rajacich v. Potter (1988), 21 B.C.L.R.(2d) 314 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].
Jordan v. Coleman et al., [1976] 1 S.C.R. 126; 3 N.R. 502, refd to. [para. 47].
Carlson v. Canada Safeway Ltd. (1983), 47 B.C.L.R. 252 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 73].
Coulson v. Canada Safeway Ltd. (1988), 32 B.C.L.R.(2d) 212 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 73].
Just v. British Columbia, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1228; [1990] 1 W.W.R. 385; 103 N.R. 1; 64 D.L.R.(4th) 689; 41 B.C.L.R.(2d) 350, refd to. [para. 76].
Barratt v. North Vancouver (Municipality), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 418; 33 N.R. 293, refd to. [para. 77].
Westcoast Transmission Co. v. Inter- provincial Steel & Pipe Corp. (1985), 60 B.C.L.R. 368, refd to. [para. 112].
Taylor v. Jaegli Enterprises Ltd. and Ankenman, [1981] 2 S.C.R. 2; 40 N.R. 4, refd to. [para. 132].
Taylor v. British Columbia (1981), 112 D.L.R.(3d) 297 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 135].
Beaudoin-Daigneault v. Richard et al., [1984] 1 S.C.R. 2; 51 N.R. 288, refd to. [para. 139].
Molchan v. Omega Oil and Gas Ltd. et al., [1988] 1 S.C.R. 348; 83 N.R. 25; 87 A.R. 81, refd to. [para. 139].
Lensen v. Lensen, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 672; 79 N.R. 334; 64 Sask.R. 6; [1988] 1 W.W.R. 481; 44 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 139].
Wilson v. Guichon and Hui (1993), 23 B.C.A.C. 284; 39 W.A.C. 284 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 143].
Andrews v. Grand & Toy (Alberta) Ltd., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229; 19 N.R. 50; 8 A.R. 182; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 452; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 577; 3 C.C.L.T. 225, refd to. [para. 155].
Thornton et al. v. Board of School Trustees of School District No. 57 et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 267; 19 N.R. 552; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 480; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 607; 3 C.C.L.T. 257, refd to. [para. 155].
Teno et al. v. Arnold et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 287; 19 N.R. 1; 3 C.C.L.T. 372; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 609, refd to. [para. 155].
Fenn v. Peterborough (1979), 25 O.R.(2d) 399 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 163].
Penso v. Solowan and Public Trustee (1982), 35 B.C.L.R. 250 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 165].
Wipfli v. Britten (1984), 56 B.C.L.R. 273 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 165].
Anderson v. James et al. (1992), 7 B.C.A.C. 205; 15 W.A.C. 205; 63 B.C.L.R.(2d) 176 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 165].
Cherry v. Borsman (1991), 75 D.L.R.(4th) 668 (B.C.S.C.), affd. (1992), 16 B.C.A.C. 93; 28 W.A.C. 93; 70 B.C.L.R.(2d) 273 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 165].
Lambright v. Schmidt, [1989] B.C.J. No. 1344 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 165].
Macdonald v. Neufeld, [1992] B.C.J. No. 1020 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 165].
Messmer v. Daley (1991), 60 B.C.L.R.(2d) 243 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 165].
Nichols v. Miller, [1992] B.C.J. No. 92 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 165].
Reekie v. Messervey (1989), 36 B.C.L.R.(2d) 316 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 193].
Statutes Noticed:
Crown Proceeding Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 86, generally [para. 80].
Insurance Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 200, sect. 254(2) [para. 8].
Interpretation Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 206, sect. 11 [para. 106].
Negligence Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 298, sect. 4 [para. 101].
Occupiers Liability Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 303, sect. 3 [para. 71]; sect. 8 [para. 80].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Cassels, Jamie, Damages for Lost Earning Capacity: Women and Children Last! (1992), 71 Can. Bar Rev. 445, generally [para. 164].
Cooper-Stephenson, K., and I. Saunders, Personal Injury Damages in Canada (1981), p. 212 [para. 164].
Reaume, Denise, Rethinking Personal Injury Damages: Compensation for Lost Capacities (1988), 67 Can. Bar Rev. 82, p. 89 [para. 164].
Waddams, S.M., The Law of Damages (2nd Ed. 1991), pp. 3 to 37 [para. 164].
Williams, Glanville, Joint Torts and Contributory Negligence (1951), ch. 1, pp. 1 [para. 107]; 44 [para. 110].
Counsel:
R.F. Hungerford and J.W. Marquardt, for the defendant/appellant;
D.W. Roberts, Q.C., S. Griffin and B. Curran, for the plaintiff/respondent;
D.C. Prowse, for the defendants/respon- dents.
This appeal was heard on November 24-27, 1992, at Vancouver, B.C., before McEachern, C.J.B.C., Southin and Proudfoot, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.
The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered on April 20, 1993, and the following opinions were filed:
Southin, J.A. (Proudfoot, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 123;
McEachern, C.J.B.C., dissenting in part - see paragraphs 124 to 195.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Compensation for Personal Injury
...the argument had not been made at trial and the evidence was insufficient. 161 (1991), 86 DLR (4th) 73 (BCSC), rev’d in part (1993) 102 DLR (4th) 518 (BCCA) [ Tucker ]. 162 Quoted from ibid at 528 (CA). 163 Ibid. The appeal of the defendant Asleson was allowed (re liability), and the appeal......
-
Table of cases
...(1991), 62 BCLR (2d) 78, 7 CCLI (2d) 217, (sub nom Tucker (Guardian ad litem of) v Asleson) 86 DLR (4th) 73 (SC), rev’d in part (1993), 78 BCLR (2d) 173, 44 MVR (2d) 178, [1993] 6 WWR 45, 102 DLR (4th) 518 (CA) ................................ 173, 174, 175 Turczinski v Dupont Heating & Air......
-
MacCabe v. Board of Education of Westlock Roman Catholic Separate School District No. 110 et al., (1998) 226 A.R. 1 (QB)
...Jacobs v. McLaughlin and Calgary (City) (1986), 71 A.R. 104; 46 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 280]. Tucker v. Asleson (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 78 B.C.L.R.(2d) 173 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Toneguzzo-Norvell et al. v. Savein and Burnaby Hospital, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 114; ......
-
Laing Property Corp. et al. v. All Seasons Display Inc. et al., (2000) 140 B.C.A.C. 203 (CA)
...N plc et al. (1995), 65 B.C.A.C. 118; 106 W.A.C. 118; 16 B.C.L.R.(3d) 115 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65]. Tucker v. Asleson et al. (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 102 D.L.R.(4th) 518 (C.A.), reving. in part (1991), 86 D.L.R.(4th) 73 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. McFee v. Joss, [1925] 2 D......
-
MacCabe v. Board of Education of Westlock Roman Catholic Separate School District No. 110 et al., (1998) 226 A.R. 1 (QB)
...Jacobs v. McLaughlin and Calgary (City) (1986), 71 A.R. 104; 46 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 280]. Tucker v. Asleson (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 78 B.C.L.R.(2d) 173 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Toneguzzo-Norvell et al. v. Savein and Burnaby Hospital, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 114; ......
-
Laing Property Corp. et al. v. All Seasons Display Inc. et al., (2000) 140 B.C.A.C. 203 (CA)
...N plc et al. (1995), 65 B.C.A.C. 118; 106 W.A.C. 118; 16 B.C.L.R.(3d) 115 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65]. Tucker v. Asleson et al. (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 102 D.L.R.(4th) 518 (C.A.), reving. in part (1991), 86 D.L.R.(4th) 73 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. McFee v. Joss, [1925] 2 D......
-
Village on the Park and Greenwood Acres, Re, (2009) 472 A.R. 230 (QB)
...74 O.R.(2d) 481 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 182]. Canada Trust Co. v. Ontario - see Leonard Foundation Trust, Re. Tucker v. Asleson et al., [1993] 6 W.W.R. 45; 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 1993 CarswellBC 94 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Kelemen v. El-Homeira (1999), 250 A.R. 67; 213 W.A.C. 67 (C.......
-
Reilly v. Lynn,
...79, 97]. Stein Estate et al. v. Ship Kathy K et al., [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802; 6 N.R. 359, refd to. [para. 79]. Tucker v. Asleson et al. (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 253; 40 W.A.C. 253; 102 D.L.R.(4th) 518; 78 B.C.L.R.(2d) 173 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 80]. Armagas Ltd. v. Mundogas S.A., [1985] 3 All E.R. ......
-
The Owners Of Strata Plan KAS3204 v. Navigator Development Corporation, 2020 BCSC 1954
...against settling wrongdoers under s. 4(2) and dragging them back into the litigation (Tucker (Public Trustee of) v. Asleson, (1993) 78 B.C.L.R. (2d) 173). To avoid a situation where the settling wrongdoer is liable to the non-settling wrongdoers, the court in British Columbia Ferry Corp. v.......
-
Compensation for Personal Injury
...the argument had not been made at trial and the evidence was insufficient. 161 (1991), 86 DLR (4th) 73 (BCSC), rev’d in part (1993) 102 DLR (4th) 518 (BCCA) [ Tucker ]. 162 Quoted from ibid at 528 (CA). 163 Ibid. The appeal of the defendant Asleson was allowed (re liability), and the appeal......
-
Table of cases
...(1991), 62 BCLR (2d) 78, 7 CCLI (2d) 217, (sub nom Tucker (Guardian ad litem of) v Asleson) 86 DLR (4th) 73 (SC), rev’d in part (1993), 78 BCLR (2d) 173, 44 MVR (2d) 178, [1993] 6 WWR 45, 102 DLR (4th) 518 (CA) ................................ 173, 174, 175 Turczinski v Dupont Heating & Air......
-
Replicating and perpetuating inequalities in personal injury claims through female-specific contingencies.
...the trial decision in Tucker (Guardian ad litem of) v. Asleson (1991), 86 D.L.R. (4th) 73, 62 B.C.L.R. (2d) 78 (S.C.), varied (1993) 102 D.L.R. (4th) 518, [1993] 6 W.W.R. 45, 78 B.C.L.R. (2d) 173 (C.A.) [Tucker cited to D.L.R.], where the court noted that the income potential of an eight-ye......