What is the test for the maxim res ipsa loquitur?

Cases on facts similar to the foregoing have involved the application of the maxim res ipsa loquitur. In Fontaine v. British Columbia (Official Administrator), 1998 CanLII 814 (SCC), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 424, the court set out the requirements which had to be met for the doctrine to apply (at ¶18): The doctrine applies (1) when the thing that inflicted the damage was under the sole management and control of the defendant, or of someone for whom he is responsible or whom he has a right to control; (2) the occurrence is such that it would not have happened without negligence. If these two conditions are satisfied it follows, on a balance of probability, that the defendant, or the person for whom he is responsible, must have been negligent. There is, however, a further negative condition: (3) there must be no evidence as to why or how the occurrence took place. If there is, then appeal to res ipsa loquitur is inappropriate, for the question of the defendant's negligence must be determined on that evidence.