Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

Citation: Adams v. Crowe, 2010 NSSC 324

 

Date: 20100912

Docket: Hfx No. 324509

Registry: Halifax

Between:

Jeffrey Adams

Appellant

v.

 

Donald Crowe

Respondent

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

Judge: The Honourable Justice Glen G. McDougall

 

Heard:            August 3, 2010 in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

Subject:           Defendant appeals the decision of a Small Claims Court Adjudicator that found him liable for damages to another person’s surf board.

 

Summary:       The appellant was paddling his surf board out to catch a wave while the respondent was riding another wave towards shore.  A collision occurred.  The appellant was found negligent and ordered to pay for the damages to the respondent’s board.  The adjudicator ruled out the defence of volenti non fit injuria and also found there was no contributory negligence on the part of the respondent.

 

Issues:            (i)         Does the Small Claims Court have jurisdiction to hear a case involving a collision between two surfers in coastal waters?

 

(ii)        Did the Learned Adjudicator err in law in finding there was a duty of care owed to the respondent and that he failed to meet the requisite standard of care?

 

(iii)       Did the Learned Adjudicator’s failure to give a decision within 60 days after the hearing, as required by s. 29(1) of the Small Claims Court Act, amount to a denial of natural justice?

 


Result:            The Small Claims Court has jurisdiction to hear the claim; the appellant owed a duty of care and breached the standard of care required of the circumstances.  As a result he was negligent and liable for the damages resulting therefrom; furthermore, the Adjudicator did not err in concluding that volenti non fit injuria did not afford a defence nor was the respondent contributorily negligent for his loss; finally, the 60-days allowed to file an order / decision is not mandatory but rather, strongly directory.   A failure to meet the deadline does not automatically result in a nullity but depending on the situation, could create an unfairness which might amount to a denial of natural justice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.