What is the test for a finding that a defendant was not aware of the danger caused by a falling tree?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Hayes v. Davis, 1991 CanLII 5716 (BC CA):
The decision in Noble v. Harrison turned upon a finding that the defendant was not aware and ought not to have been aware of the actual danger of the branch of the tree which fell.
"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.
Other Questions
What is the test for a finding that a judge must not make a finding which would directly contradict a finding previously made by another judge? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can knowledge of a cause of cause be used as grounds for cause of dismissal? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a jury to find a defendant liable for damage caused by an ice stopper? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for finding a defendant strictly liable for damages caused by a chemical spillage on a piece of land? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a motion to extend the time for a finding of subjective intention of a defendant to have a trial by jury? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff entitled to recover damages from a defendant for damage caused to his back? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a finding of no misconduct in a professional conduct review panel finding no misconduct? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a defendant be liable for causing nervous shock and physical injury to a plaintiff by falsely claiming that her husband had been injured in an accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for malicious intent in the context of an appeal against the findings of a finding of malicious intent? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant is liable for causing a plaintiff’s injury? (British Columbia, Canada)
