How have courts interpreted causation in a motor vehicle accident case?

Alberta, Canada


The following excerpt is from Reid v. Maloney, 2010 ABQB 794 (CanLII):

In Snell v. Farrell, at para. 26, Sopinka, J. speaking for the court described causation as: ..an expression of the relationship that must be found to exist between the tortious act of the wrongdoer and the injury to the victim in order to justify compensation of the latter out of the pocket of the former.

Other Questions


In a motor vehicle accident case where the victim is not dead but still exists, is there any case law that supports the presumption that the accident victim’s death is not an accident? (Alberta, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident case, in what circumstances will a plaintiff not be liable for failing to warn the driver of the vehicle that there is no evidence that such warnings would have prevented the accident? (Alberta, Canada)
Does the burden of proof against the Registrar of Motor Vehicles apply to motor vehicle accident claims? (Alberta, Canada)
What are the arguments raised by the trial judge in a motor vehicle accident case for damages for years lost by a plaintiff who is not injured but injured? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for establishing causation in a motor vehicle accident? (Alberta, Canada)
In what circumstances will a second counsel fee be awarded in a motor vehicle accident case? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for causation in motor vehicle accidents? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the limitation of liability of a defendant in a motor vehicle accident case? (Alberta, Canada)
Can intent be considered as part of the risk analysis in a motor vehicle accident case? (Alberta, Canada)
How have courts apportioned the 80-20 split between liability and apportionment of liability in a motor vehicle accident? (Alberta, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.