Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 21:38:44 -0500

From: David Cheifetz

Subject: Two Questions

on Q2

A recent Canadian case dealing with the apportionment process that holds it's objective -

Heller v. Martens, 2002 ABCA 122 (Alberta CA, CanLII) at para 30

[30] The comparative blameworthiness approach requires a court to examine all the circumstances of the parties' misconduct to determine their relative negligence. Ultimately, this requires "an assessment of relative misconduct from the perspective of departures from standards of reasonable care": Klar, supra at 374.

David

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Stevens"
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:18 AM
Subject: ODG: Two Questions

...

Problem Two

In a claim for contribution between two careless tortfeasors, does the court apply the same test in determining relative 'fault' as it would in deciding whether the tort has been committed? So, if two drivers D1 and D2 both carelessly cause a car accident which results in injuries to P, could D1 argue that she was a learner driver whilst D2 was a professional chauffeur so that the contribution as between the two of them should not be equal? Or, as between D1 and D2 do we apply the objective standard which we would apply in the claim by P against either one of them? Cases?

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>