Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 DECEMBER 2013

Leaving The Recreational Trail

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Contributor
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

With over 750 lawyers, intellectual property agents and other professionals, BLG services...

View firm profile
Explore more from Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

In Pierce v. Hamilton (City), 2013 ONSC 6485, the Court dismissed a claim against a municipality arising from an accident which took place off of a recreational trail.

CanadaInsurance

In Pierce v. Hamilton (City), 2013 ONSC 6485, the Court dismissed a claim against a municipality arising from an accident which took place off of a recreational trail.

On October 1, 2005, shortly after midnight, the 17 year old plaintiff went with a group of friends to Scenic Drive Park (the "park"), adjacent to the Niagara Escarpment. The group followed a trail to a lookout point. On the way back to their car, the plaintiff went off on his own on a dirt path through the woods. Unfortunately, the dirt path ended abruptly at a ravine. He stepped forward and fell to the bottom of the ravine, seriously injuring his left femur and wrist.

LAW

The plaintiff commenced an action against the City of Hamilton. The City admitted that it was an occupier pursuant to the Occupiers' Liability Act (the "Act"). Section 3 of the Act requires occupiers to take reasonable steps to see that persons entering a premises are reasonably safe. In some cases, where a plaintiff has

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from