The following excerpt is from Winnipeg Condominium Corporation No. 613 v. Concord Projects Ltd., et al, 2014 MBQB 13 (CanLII):
In Vargo v. Canmore (Town), 2011 ABQB 649, after a thorough review of the leading authorities, Hawco J. stated the following at paragraph 68: 68 I am simply not satisfied that our Court of Appeal intended to require that a defective roof must not only be in danger of collapse but that it be in imminent danger of collapse before a plaintiff may take steps to ensure that the perceived danger does not result in actual harm to his family and others and be compensated for doing so.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.