Absence of signs warning of depression in road where collision occurred did not constitute state of non-repair

Plaintiff brought action in negligence involving motor vehicle collision. Other plaintiffs were family members of plaintiff, who brought claims under Family Law Act. Defendants remaining at time of trial were driver, RH, and Regional Municipality. Plaintiff reached settlement with driver. Action dismissed. Depression in road where collision occurred did not constitute state of non-repair of the road within meaning of s. 44 of Municipal Act (“Act”). There was no breach of standard of care by municipality in this regard. Absence of signs warning of depression in road where collision occurred (or in advance) did not constitute state of non-repair within the meaning of s. 44 of Act. Location of hydro guide pole, and absence of barrier did not constitute state of non-repair within the meaning of s. 44 of Act. Because there was no breach of the standard of care, there was no negligence by municipality that contributed to cause of collision.

Stamatopoulos v. The Regional Municipality of Durham (2019), 2019 CarswellOnt 3585, 2019 ONSC 603, J. Copeland J. (Ont. S.C.J.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca.