Canadian Legal System
The attempt or threat of the physical application of force on an unwilling party is known as...
Assault
The two limitations to the duty of care under the Anns test.
Proximity & Public Policy
While Jerry is walking home from work, a man jumps out of a bush armed with a knife and demands all of Jerry's money. Terrified, Jerry obliges and hands over his wallet. As the thief is running away, Jerry pulls out his handgun and proceeds to shoot at the thief, killing him.
Is this an example of reasonable force?
No. While the thief did present as a threat while he was in the process of robing Jerry, once he turned to run he no longer became a threat.
Guilt in criminal trials are determined by beyond a reasonable doubt, while liability in civil trials is determined by what.
Balance of Probablities
Private nuisance interferes with others' use of their property while public nuisance is what.
Affects the public in general (ex. Pollution)
The test used to determine if there was a breach in the standard of care (Definition as well).
The Reasonable Person Test - what would a reasonable person be expected to do in a similar circumstance.
Samantha had taken her employer to the BC Employment Standards Tribunal for discrimination and has lost the case. Assuming Samantha exhausted all options she has before her in this administrative tribunal, if she were to appeal her case, where would it be heard?
Supreme Court of British Columbia
The three Alternative Dispute Resolutions (ADR)
1. Arbitration
2. Negotiation
3. Mediation
The definition of false imprisonment requires physical restraint. True or False.
False. You can falsely imprison someone as long as they reasonably believed they had no choice.
The ABCs of Negligence
A Duty of Care
Breach of the Standard of Care
Causation
Damages
Ron was driving home after a long day of work. Exhausted, he started to dose off at the wheel. This led to him to nearly crash into another driver at a four-way intersection. The other driver, furious, threatens to take Ron to court for negligence.
Does this constitute negligence?
No, while Ron failed to meet the duty and standard of care, there was no damages (assuming no emotional damages), therefore, this case would not move forward.
The three required factors for a court to be bound by precedent?
1. Decision is made by the higher courts
2. Decision is made in the same jurisdiction.
3. Decision is based on materially similar facts.
The three defences to Trespass.
1. Authority
2. Consent
3. Accident but not mistake
The reasonable person in law is a person that...
A careful person who, in possession of all relevant facts, exercises the utmost care
A disgruntled student who received a terrible mark on their accounting midterm decided to rant on Instagram about how all accounting professors in Vancouver received their degrees from diploma mills, abuse their spouses, and cheated on the CPA exam. An accounting professor from SFU, recognizing that their student wrote this comment, decided to sue the student for damages.
Would this constitute defamation?
No. While the statement is damaging, was published, and is a false statement, the statement doesn't refer to anyone in particular, thus cannot be pursued as defamation.
The four levels of British Columbian courts.
1. Supreme Court of Canada
2. Appeals Court of British Columbia
3. Supreme Court of British Columbia
4. Provincial Court of British Columbia // Tribunals
The five defences to defamation
1. Truth
2. Qualified Privilege
3. Absolute Privilege
4. Fair Comment
5. Public Interest Responsible Journalism
The defences to negligence.
1. Contributory Negligence
2. Voluntary Assumption of Risk
3. Remoteness.
As a part of a high school prank, Ethan decides to hide in the staff lunch room and scare teachers as they are coming back from their lunch break. A couple teachers came in, got scared by Ethan, laughed and moved on. However, Mr. Smith who suffers from anxiety and a heart condition later enters the room. When he does, he is scared by Ethan and proceeds to have a heart attack. Mr. Smith decides to sue Ethan.
Ethan claims that every other teacher didn't take issue and that he had no idea that Mr. Smith had these pre-existing conditions, further claiming that this was an accident.
Is Ethan liable?
Ethan would be in the wrong.
1. This is not an accident; this would be classified as a mistake as in Tort law as while Ethan intended the action, he did not intend the outcome.
2. Thin skull theory; We take the victim as we find them even if their reaction due to pre-existing conditions is more extreme than usual.