cases-flash-cards-tort-test1 Flashcards
Tort Nuisance and Negligence
Name the case / Describe the facts
right to sunlight in regards to solar panels
Prah v. Maretti 1982
Name the case / Describe the facts
public benefit’ defence from brick-maker is admonished by judge who states property owners must be compensated
Bamford v Turnley 1862
Name the case / Describe the facts
Qualifies stringent adherence to the hand formula as impossible
McCarty v Pheasant Run Inc. 1987
Name the case / Describe the facts
Hunter v Canary Warf
skyscraper blocked television signal 1997
Name the case / Describe the facts
no right to air, plaintiff brought about his own misfortune
Bryant v Lefever 1879
Name the case / Describe the facts
Rogers v Elliot
ringing church bell disturbs plaintiff 1888
Name the case / Describe the facts
public works must not interfere with the private rights of individuals unless protected by statute. Provincial legislature later passed stute protecting sewage plants.
Stephens v Village of Richmond Hill 1955
Name the case / Describe the facts
motorcyclist got bike stuck in the tracks, sued for nuisance
Ryan v Victoria 1999
Name the case / Describe the facts
Describe Bender’s feminist critique of Tort
the feminine perspective of altruism, caring, holds individuals to a higher standard of care than the minimalist perspective of masculine rights based jurisprudence 1988
Name the case / Describe the facts
statutes may draw on nuisance law to learn about remedies; three step process to determine whether statute was breached
Antrim Truck Centre Ltd. v. Ontario (Transportation) 2013
Name the case / Describe the facts
new inference rule, res ipsa loqitor, established in landmark case
Byrne v Boddel 1863
Name the case / Describe the facts
Prah v. Maretti
cannot block a house’s sunlight for solar power 1982
Name the case / Describe the facts
Shuttelworth v. Vancouver General Hospital
people are afraid of disease from nearby hospital 1927
Name the case / Describe the facts
Mansfeild v. Weetabix
trucker does not know he had low blood sugar and causes havoc on the roads 1998
Name the case / Describe the facts
Thompson-Schwab v. Costaki
prostitution business is considered a nuisance 1952
Name the case / Describe the facts
One has no right to a view for purposes of delight
Aldred’s Case (16 19)16 19
Name the case / Describe the facts
Negligence is famously defined in this case as; “Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man… would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do”
Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Company 1856
Name the case / Describe the facts
Robberts v Ramsbottom
Driver had a stroke prior to collision drove with judgement impaired 1980
Name the case / Describe the facts
McHale v Watson
12 year old throws a chunk of metal that blinds another child in one eye 1966
Name the case / Describe the facts
Canada Paper Company v Brown
Home-owner shuts down smelly paper mill 1922
Name the case / Describe the facts
Injunction was imposed on paper mill but subsequent statutes were imposed to protect mills
KVP Co. Ltd. v McKie 1949
Name the case / Describe the facts
evidence is admitted to establish ‘proof of custom and usage’ that is indicative of reasonable precautions
Trimarco v Klein 1982
Name the case / Describe the facts
temporary insanity was first used a defence against negligence; test for insanity is if it had a causal relationship tothe act
Buckley v. Smith Transport Ltd. 1946
Name the case / Describe the facts
in a case where one employee slipped, the fact that no other employees slipped is used to indicate the risk was low
Latimer v AEC 1953
Name the case / Describe the facts
What does Prosser outline as the court and jury’s prerogatives in Tort Law?
1 sufficiency of evidence (J); 2 weight of evidence (J); 3 existence of a duty (C); 4 ‘general’ standard of conduct (J*); 5 ‘particular’ standard of conduct(J*)
Name the case / Describe the facts
Pornography store nearby is a nuisance
Laws v. Florinplace Ltd. 1981
Name the case / Describe the facts
TH Critelli v LincolN Trust and Savings Co
defendant builds building, causing snow to accumulate on neighbour 1978
Name the case / Describe the facts
A horse-riding plaintiff is not negligent if the horse he is riding was spurned out of fear or by a third party
Gibbons v Pepper 1695
Name the case / Describe the facts
Coase’s criticism of Sturges v Bridgeman regarding the economic analysis of the judge
there are times when one plaintiff’s gain so outweighs the others loss that private contract should be encouraged rather than injunction in order to maximize allocation of resources
Name the case / Describe the facts
a foreseeable risk, even a highly unlikely risk, must be prevented unless a reasonable has reason to not do so (such as prohibitive cost)
Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v miller Steamship Co. (Wagon Mound No. 2) 1967
Name the case / Describe the facts
340909 Ontario Ltd. v. Huron Steel Products (Windsor) Ltd.
factory makes noise; court asks factory to limit noise to certain hours 1990
Name the case / Describe the facts
Kenway v. Thomson
plaintiff inherits a lake, requests injunction on water-skiing 1980
Name the case / Describe the facts
Sturges v. Bridgman
plaintiff builds new room and complains of noise from neighbours mortars in kitchen. The neighbour had partaken in these activities for 20 years 1879
Name the case / Describe the facts
we must not look on 1947 with 1952 spectacles’ – Lord Denning
Roe v Ministry of Natural Health 1954
Name the case / Describe the facts
Antrim Truck Centre Ltd. v. Ontario (Transportation)
Highway destroys truck stop - 1) substantial? 2) reasonable? 3) significant and permanent? 2013
Name the case / Describe the facts
Bolton v Stone
a cricket ball causes injury to a plaintiff on the highway, very low probability of event is established 1951
Name the case / Describe the facts
landmark case explaining proximate cause when a firecracker (squib) was thrown around by many people in a room
Scott v Shepherd 1773
Name the case / Describe the facts
Name the case where Lord Reid reconciles cases where foreseeability and extreme unlikelihood factor in negligence
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt 1979
Name the case / Describe the facts
Anderson v Somberg
doctors, hospital, supplier and manufacturer are jointly held negligent for a tool breaking in surgery because they cannot distinguish who is individually negligent 1975
Name the case / Describe the facts
Appleby v Erie Tobacco
a tobacco factory makes a noxious smell 1910
Name the case / Describe the facts
Black v Canadian Copper Inc.
large mining interest pays damages, but injunction is avoided because of their size and importance in community 1917
Name the case / Describe the facts
Buckley v. Smith Transport Ltd.
man with syphilis of the brain goes insane and crashes into street car 1946
Name the case / Describe the facts
Trimarco v Klein
shattered shower glass causes injury, it was uncommon in the industry to have shattering glass in shower; case ordered for retrial because regulations passed after the event were used 1982
Name the case / Describe the facts
prostitution next door can be a nuisance
Thompson-Schwab v. Costaki 1952
Name the case / Describe the facts
Differentiate Wagon Mound No1 and Wagon Mound No2
No1 emphasized a test for foreseeability (burning down the dock), No2 duty of care to eliminate risk (burning the three ships)
Name the case / Describe the facts
no need for damage to physical health required for nuisance
Flemming v Hislop 1886
Name the case / Describe the facts
Which phase would Prosser prefer be removed from Tort lexicon?
Res Ipsa Loquitor
Name the case / Describe the facts
no right to sunlight; blocking it for business interest makes maliciousness irrelevant
Fountainbleu Hotel Corp v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five Inc. 1959
Name the case / Describe the facts
There are circumstances in which it is impossible for the individual to assert his individual rights as to inflict a substantial injury on the whole community’
Black v Canadian Copper Inc. 1917
Name the case / Describe the facts
mere autocratic assertions of what will be more conducive to the prosperity of the local community’ by paper mill cannot trump property rights
Canada Paper Company v Brown 1922
Name the case / Describe the facts
How should the designation of res ipsa loquitor change the burden of proof according to…?
Schiff- res ipsa loqitor does not change the burden of proof
Name the case / Describe the facts
Latimer v AEC
employer does everything he can short of shutting down factory; plaintiff sues for injury when he slips 1953
Name the case / Describe the facts
Landmark case where negligence was decided by the Hand Formula
The United States v Carol Towing Co. 1947
Name the case / Describe the facts
Fleming v Hislop
smoke caused by brick-maker was a nuisance 1886
Name the case / Describe the facts
negligence is held by the standard of an ordinary man, not a man judging ‘to the best of his abilities’
Vaughn v Menlove 1837
Name the case / Describe the facts
four arguments for nuisance levied against a nearby hospital all fail
Shuttelworth v. Vancouver General Hospital 1927
Name the case / Describe the facts
sports can be a nuisance, escalation of sports activity
Kenway v. Thomson 1980
Name the case / Describe the facts
Hollywood Silverfox Farm Ltd v. Emmet
shooting guns to disturb neighbours fox farm 1936
Name the case / Describe the facts
Laws v. Florinplace Ltd.
pornography store in the neighbourhood is declared nuisance 1981
Name the case / Describe the facts
Ybarra v Spanguard
several medical professional operate on an unconscious plaintiff, his neck is injured but he cannot identify who did it; res ipsa loqitor invoked 1944
Name the case / Describe the facts
A doctor acting within the standards of his profession will not generally be called into negligence because courts do not have the expertise to tell professionals they are not behaving appropriately in their fields
ter Neuzen v Korn 1995
Name the case / Describe the facts
Fountainbleu Hotel Corp v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five Inc.
big hotel blocks sun of small hotel 1959
Name the case / Describe the facts
noise is a nuisance and maliciousness is a factor
Hollywood Silverfox Farm Ltd v. Emmet 1936
Name the case / Describe the facts
Describe Posner’s critique of Bender’s feminist perspective on Tort
Bender’s critique just equates to strict liability and it is unclear how the net distribution will be affected
Name the case / Describe the facts
plaintiff uses res ipsa loquitor (RIL), but judge rules that RIL counter’s a non-suit claim by defendant, but does not change the burden of proof
Fontaine v British Columbia 1998
Name the case / Describe the facts
there are four narrow conditions when nuisance can avoid injunction and just pay damages
Shelfer v City of London Electrical Lighting Co. 1895
Name the case / Describe the facts
noise is intermittent which makes it worse; nuisance passes significant test – all factors analyzed for remedy except who got there first
340909 Ontario Ltd. v. Huron Steel Products (Windsor) Ltd. 1990
Name the case / Describe the facts
The T.J. Hooper
tugboats are not equipped with radio; no industry custom; radio would have prevented damage; tugboats avoid liability 1932
Name the case / Describe the facts
Sites of hospital’s sick causing the arousal of empathy is not sufficient for nuisance
Shuttelworth v. Vancouver General Hospital 1927
Name the case / Describe the facts
Res Ipsa Loquitor is used to sue doctor, hospital, suppliers and manufacturers
Anderson v Somberg 1975
Name the case / Describe the facts
The Mayor etc. Of Bradford v. Pickles
property owner diverts stream from town’s water supply 1895
Name the case / Describe the facts
Sport is in public interest,playing sports near encroaching property must compensate for damages, not injunction
Miller v Jackson 1977
Name the case / Describe the facts
ter Neuzen v Korn
Dr. uses artificial insemination on plaintiff, gives her HIV, but acted within standards of industry 1995
Name the case / Describe the facts
protection from nuisance by statue is conditional; three different rationals – depending on ‘permissiveness’, ‘discretion’, and ‘inevitability’ of action
Tock v. St. Johns Metropolitan Area Board 1989
Name the case / Describe the facts
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt
reconciles Wagonmound No2 with Bolton v Stone 1979
Name the case / Describe the facts
Miller v Jackson
owners of newly built houses want injunction on nearby cricket field 1977
Name the case / Describe the facts
Smell is a nuisance, delay on injunction indicates protection of business interests
Appleby v Erie Tobacco 1910
Name the case / Describe the facts
Denning – ‘in the absence of evidence to draw a distinction between [the contributing plaintiffs], they must both be held to blame’
Baker v Market Harborough Industrial Society Ltd 1953
Name the case / Describe the facts
Bamford v Turnley
defendants burn brick 1862
Name the case / Describe the facts
Byrne v Boddel
plaintiff’s barrel of flour drops out of a window causing injury, new evidence and inference rule establishes negligence 1863
Name the case / Describe the facts
The United States v Carol Towing Co.
Barge was left unattended, left moorings and collided with another ship 1947
Name the case / Describe the facts
in measuring due care one must balance risk against the measures necessary to eliminate risk’; emergency responders must reason accordingly
Watt v Hertfordhire County Council 1954
Name the case / Describe the facts
childhood limits the ability to foresee harm, be prudent, and appreciate risk; childhood is not an idiosyncrasy
McHale v Watson 1966
Name the case / Describe the facts
there is a good deal of advantage in being there first
TH Critelli v Lincoln Trust and Savings Co 1978
Name the case / Describe the facts
the risk must be balanced with the cost of precautions; does severity and likelihood of risk require an entire factory to be shut down?
Latimer v AEC 1953
Name the case / Describe the facts
Tock v. St. Johns Metropolitan Area Board
plaintiff sues city (that was operating under statute) for flooding basement; depending on ‘permissiveness’, ‘discretion’, and ‘inevitability’ of action 1989
Name the case / Describe the facts
custom is relevant to negligence; if there is no customary precaution it may mitigate or nullify liability
The T.J. Hooper, mitigated (superseded?) by Carroll Towing 1947 ruling 1932
Name the case / Describe the facts
all plaintiff’s in control of an unconscious body may by inferred of negligence
Ybarra v Spanguard 1944
Name the case / Describe the facts
Boomer v Atlantic Cement
large cement company avoids injunction due to its size and importance to community 1970
Name the case / Describe the facts
particular vulnerability of plaintiff is not a factor in nuisance
Rogers v Elliot 1888
Name the case / Describe the facts
Baker v Market Harborough Industrial Society Ltd
Two drivers collide head on in the road, both die, both were found equally negligent 1953
Name the case / Describe the facts
impairment of judgement must be sudden and total to avoid negligence; defendant was negligent but not “morally to blame”
Robberts v Ramsbottom 1980
Name the case / Describe the facts
property rights cause injunction with no exception for business interest, how long the business operated or who was there first
Sturges v. Bridgman 1879
Name the case / Describe the facts
Watt v Hertfordhire County Council
fireman gets injured while responding to an emergency call by an improperly secured jack 1954
Name the case / Describe the facts
Criminal case where a 16 year old was provoked and stabbed provoker; it was questioned whether age reduces standard of reasonable care
R v Hill 1986
Name the case / Describe the facts
When children engage in adult activity that is normally insured they will be held to an adult’s standard of care
McEarlean v Sarel 1987
Name the case / Describe the facts
negligence is not just established on foreseeability but on probability; if extremely improbable, negligence cannot be established. Negligence is not based on fairness but on culpability
Bolton v Stone 1951
Name the case / Describe the facts
Fontaine v British Columbia
res ipsa loquitor is used, and fails, to establish negligence in a car accident on a night of flooding. Shciff likes this decision on res ipsa loquitor 1998
Name the case / Describe the facts
landowner can divert water
The Mayor etc. Of Bradford v. Pickles 1895
Name the case / Describe the facts
Bryant v Lefever
adjoining houses and defendant makes his house much higher inconveniencing the other, blocking airflow 1879
Name the case / Describe the facts
McEarlean v Sarel
teenagers cause injury while motorbiking 1987
Name the case / Describe the facts
First ‘compensated injunction’, encroaching developer forced to pay damages for the injunction they imposed upon farmer
Spur Industries v Del E. Webb Development Co. 1972
Name the case / Describe the facts
disruption of TV is not nuisance
Hunter v Canary Warf 1997
Name the case / Describe the facts
There must be a cut-off point where children become treated as “reasonable persons”, and that they must approach this point incrementally
R v Hill 1986
Name the case / Describe the facts
standard of care should be measured as to what a reasonable person should do if they are unaware of their impaired condition
Mansfeild v. Weetabix 1998
Name the case / Describe the facts
American landmark where injunction was ruled as unfair to the defendant, imposed an unjust burden
Boomer v Atlantic Cement 1970
