2016 QCCQ 15541, 2016 QCCQ 15541

Black c. Côte St-Luc (City of) 2016 QCCQ 15541 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-148456-157 DATE: December 15, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ MONA BLACK Plaintiff v.

CITY OF CÔTE SAINT-LUC Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On January 6, 2015, plaintiff fell on a slippery sidewalk in the City of Côte Saint-Luc, and unfortunately fractured her wrist.

Her injury required medical treatment, including surgery. [ 2 ] Plaintiff is suing defendant, in damages, for $5,500.00 for her pain and suffering. [ 3 ] She alleges defendant was negligent in the maintenance of its sidewalk, following the inclement weather of January 4, 5 and 6, 2015, which included approximately 50 mm of rain, over 90 cm of snow, as well as freezing rain. [ 4 ] Defendant alleges that its public works department acted diligently, at all times, over said 3 day period, with a view to ensure the safety of its citizens. [ 5 ] According to the preponderance of evidence, including the credible testimony of forepersons Joane Warren and Sylvain Préville; weather report, exhibit D-1; and work sheets/log, exhibit D-3.

It appears that the entire South-West territory of the city, where the street in question is located, was indeed diligently and repeatedly cleaned and salted over the period in question. [ 6 ] Article 585 (7) of the Cities and Towns Act [1] states: « Notwithstanding any general law or special Act, no municipality may be held liable for damage resulting from an accident, of which any person is the victim, on the sidewalks, streets, roads, walkways or bikeways, by reason of the snow or ice, unless the claimant establishes that the said accident was caused by the negligence or fault of the said municipality, the court having to take into account the weather conditions. » [ 7 ] Plaintiff did not, in fact, establish that the accident was caused by defendant’s fault or negligence. [ 8 ] On the contrary, despite the harsh and difficult weather conditions, it appears that defendant took all the necessary precautions to ensure the safety of its citizens at this time. [ 9 ] As stated by the Supreme Court of Canada, [2] the fact that a person falls on the sidewalk does not necessarily give rise to a claim in damages; the standard of care required of municipalities is not one of perfection; and municipalities are not an insurer of pedestrians. [ 10 ] WHEREAS defendant acted in a prudent and diligent manner; [ 11 ] GIVEN the absence of fault or negligence on defendant’s part; WHEREFORE THE COURT HEREBY: DISMISSES plaintiff’s application, without costs. [3]

__________________________________ ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: November 28, 2016