Milton Hydro Distribution Inc. v. Corporation of the Town of Milton, S.C.C No. 40939 (leave to appeal from 2023 ONCA 529)

Loopstra Nixon Partners Charles Loopstra and Paul Martin successfully represented the Town of Milton in opposing a leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Milton Hydro had previously obtained summary judgment against our client in a multi-million dollar catastrophic injury claim related to the removal of a street light. The application for leave to appeal was filed after we successfully represented the Town of Milton at the Court of Appeal. (See Milton Hydro Distribution Inc. v. Corporation of the Town of Milton, S.C.C No. 40939 (leave to appeal from 2023 ONCA 529))

The key takeaways are:

  1. There can be concurrent duties of care by different actors;
  2. Carrying out a negligent inspection or a subsequent failure to carry out a statutory duty does not automatically remove liability from one of the negligent actors; and
  3. The passage of time does not necessarily determine foreseeability.  The time to examine foreseeability is at the time the negligent act occurred.

Related people