Our precedent case: Case name: Crocker v Sundance Northwest Resorts Ltd._______ CanLii citation: 1988 CanLII 45 (SCC)________________________ Our precedent case has played an important role in the development of Canadian law; according to our textbook, it stands for the following principle (you may quote your textbook here):
Through our research we identified the following 2 cases where our precedent case was used by the Court to help determine the outcome.
CanLii citation: 2013 NSCA 95 (CanLII)__________________
CanLii citation: 2003 CanLII 25623 (ON SC)______________ Name of Case and Citation: Burton Canada Company v. Coady, 2013 NSCA 95 (CanLII) Type and Level of Case: Superior Court Facts:
How the Court Applied the Principles: The court considered that Burton and Wentworth owned a duty of care to Coady. As an occupier, the company should warn snowboarders the inherent risks of snowboarding, particularly for a snowboarder who is under the age of 18. Also, some instructions should be given to the snowboarders when they want to try the unfamiliar high-end board. The court rejected Burtonâ€™s defence of voluntary assumption of risk. As the snowboarding involves certain inherent risks, these dangers and hazards may result in serious personal injury or death. However, no signature was signed on Codayâ€™s waiver by his parents or guardians, and the tragedy could be avoided if Burton insisted on parentâ€™s signing. Burton asserted that Coady also had contributory negligence due to previously purchasing high-caffeine energy drinks. Nevertheless, the Judge pointed out the plaintiff was not affected by the drink and he did not take any particular energy drink before the accident.
We will send an essay sample to you in 24 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper