I am satisfied that, whether the plaintiff's vehicle was going 50 to 60 kilometres per hour as the plaintiff estimated or whether it was going 60 to 70 kilometres per hour as the defendant estimated, the defendant has not shown that any excessive speed by the plaintiff prevented her from taking reasonable measures to avoid the accident. In the case at bar, I make the identical finding of fact as was found by Stromberg-Stein J. in Matteazzi v. Roufosse  B.C.J. (Q.L.) No. 1078: The plaintiff misjudged the speed and distance of the defendant's van, turning in front of the van when the defendant had no opportunity to avoid a collision. The plaintiff totally failed in his primary duty to ensure his left turn could be made safely before he commenced his turn. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that the defendant was speeding or, if he was speeding, that this was the proximate cause of the accident. (at para.24)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.