What is the case law on "res ipsa loquitur" argument against the pilot in a commercial aircraft case?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Wessels v. Holthuysen, 1996 CanLII 2058 (BC SC):
9 The learned Master emphasized that if that was the only scientific inquiry involved, the action would be appropriate for a jury trial. With respect to the Wessels v. Cessna action he said: "...there is a vast amount of scientific evidence to put before the trier of fact which relates basically to what I might describe as a res ipsa loquitur argument against the pilot."
"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.alexi.com.
Other Questions
In a Workers’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal case, is there any case law that supports the argument that there is no case law in favour of a claim under the Employment Benefits Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a trial judge has a duty to make a decision based on expert testimony? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that supports the argument that a loss is an assessment, not a mathematical calculation? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the case law on the re-opening of a plaintiff’s case in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the case law in favour of the Court of Appeal in the case of the Supreme Court of Canada's most senior judge in the matter of personal injury? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law in which an appeal from a decision refusing approval of an infant settlement is successful? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law supporting the argument that a claim is not a contractual claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that past loss of earning capacity affects future earning capacity? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that a radiologist will inevitably conclude that a fracture is present, based on the x-ray, and that the radiologist’s opinion is that the fracture should not have been diagnosed? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there a compelling case law argument that intervenor costs should not be awarded to an intervenor? (British Columbia, Canada)
