What is the test for finding negligence in a motor vehicle accident?

37. To find negligence in this case, the applicant must prove each of the following on a balance of probabilities: (a) The respondent owners owed the applicant a duty of care; (b) The respondent owners breached the standard of care; (c) The applicant sustained damage; and (d) The respondent owners’ breach of the standard of care caused the damage, in fact and in law. Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd., 2008 SCC 27 at paragraph 3

38. In cases such as this, where the precise event that caused the water to escape is unknown, the applicant must adduce sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence to establish a prima facie case that the respondent owners have acted negligently. A prima facie case means that the applicant’s versions of events is accepted as correct until and unless the respondent can prove otherwise. If the evidence supports a prima facie case of negligence, the respondent owners must then offer evidence to refute or neutralize the applicant’s evidence, or the tribunal may find them liable for the damages (Fontaine v. ICBC, 1998 CanLII 814 (SCC), 1997 SCJ No. 100). While negligence cannot be inferred as a matter of law whenever water escapes a unit, such an inference may be drawn as a matter of fact in a particular case (Rhodes v. Surrey (City), 2018 BCCA 281 at paragraph 42).