Collusion at Fault Rules: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Highway Traffic]] | [[Category:Highway Traffic]] | ||
[[Category:Tort]] | |||
[[Category:Personal Injury]] | |||
==Fault Determination Rules, RRO 1990, Reg 668<ref name="Reg668"/>== | ==Fault Determination Rules, RRO 1990, Reg 668<ref name="Reg668"/>== | ||
<ref name="Reg668">Fault Determination Rules, RRO 1990, Reg 668, <http://canlii.ca/t/53ggp> retrieved on 2020-12-01</ref> | |||
==Sobh v RBC General Ins., 2016 ONSC 7382 (CanLII)<ref name="Sboh"/>== | |||
17] The Fault Determination Rules[6]<ref, although not binding on tort actions, apportion liability in a rear-end collision at one-hundred percent (100%) for the driver of the rear vehicle and zero percent (0%) for the driver of the lead vehicle. | |||
[18] Canadian courts have consistently found, generally speaking, the operator of a rear vehicle at fault for rear-end collisions.[7] | |||
[19] The common law principle of fault attribution to the rear vehicle in rear-end collisions is not absolute and is subject to a careful examination of whether the rear-driver and, by necessity, the lead-driver were acting reasonably in the circumstances.[8] | |||
[20] RBC has filed a series of cases where Courts of Appeal have seen fit to apportion liability in rear-end collisions. Examples include: (i) where a truck is parked in the middle of the road because it ran out of gas[9]; (ii) where a vehicle is stopped in the middle of a road in a winter storm to check the brakes[10]; and (iii) where a vehicle comes to an unexplained sudden stop.[11] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 14:47, 5 July 2022
Fault Determination Rules, RRO 1990, Reg 668[1]
Sobh v RBC General Ins., 2016 ONSC 7382 (CanLII)[2]
17] The Fault Determination Rules[6]<ref, although not binding on tort actions, apportion liability in a rear-end collision at one-hundred percent (100%) for the driver of the rear vehicle and zero percent (0%) for the driver of the lead vehicle.
[18] Canadian courts have consistently found, generally speaking, the operator of a rear vehicle at fault for rear-end collisions.[7]
[19] The common law principle of fault attribution to the rear vehicle in rear-end collisions is not absolute and is subject to a careful examination of whether the rear-driver and, by necessity, the lead-driver were acting reasonably in the circumstances.[8]
[20] RBC has filed a series of cases where Courts of Appeal have seen fit to apportion liability in rear-end collisions. Examples include: (i) where a truck is parked in the middle of the road because it ran out of gas[9]; (ii) where a vehicle is stopped in the middle of a road in a winter storm to check the brakes[10]; and (iii) where a vehicle comes to an unexplained sudden stop.[11]
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Fault Determination Rules, RRO 1990, Reg 668, <http://canlii.ca/t/53ggp> retrieved on 2020-12-01
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedSboh
