What is the current state of the law in the context of tripping on the edge of a sidewalk?

I have said that cases of this kind are fact specific and other cases provide little guidance beyond the general principles. However, out of respect for the very capable and concise submissions of defence counsel, I wish to deal briefly with the two cases she emphasized. In Gervais v. Do, 2000 BCSC 1271, the plaintiff tripped on the edge of a sidewalk where it abutted a parking lot. The court held that people walking in such transition areas should reasonably expect changes in elevation between the two surfaces. I do not consider that to be comparable to a situation involving holes that are well within an otherwise relatively flat and smooth paved surface.

Martinig v. Powell River (District), 2002 BCSC 24, involved a baseball field, where some unevenness of ground is always to be expected. Again, that is very different from a paved surface of what is in effect a walkway. The court also found in that case that the municipal defendant had a reasonable system of inspection and had not discovered any unusual danger.