However, the statutory right-of-way is not absolute and does not absolve the dominant driver of liability where he fails to exercise due care and caution in the circumstances (Theriault v. Huctwith, 1948 CanLII 27 (SCC),  3 D.L.R. 542 (S.C.C.)). As stated by Cartwright J. in Walker v. Brownlee, supra, at 461: While the decision of every motor vehicle collision case must depend on its particular facts, I am of opinion that when A, the driver in the servient position, proceeds through an intersection in complete disregard of his statutory duty to yield the right-of-way and a collision results, if he seeks to cast any portion of the blame upon B, the driver having the right-of-way, A must establish that after B became aware, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have become aware, of A's disregard of the law B had in fact a sufficient opportunity to avoid the accident of which a reasonably careful and skillful driver would have availed himself; and I do not think that in such circumstances any doubts should be resolved in favour of A, whose unlawful conduct was fons et origo mali. [emphasis added]
Get a full legal research memo!
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.