What is considered to be wilful blindness and recklessness in the context of a civil case?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Bronson v. Hewitt, 2010 BCSC 169 (CanLII):
Recklessness and wilful blindness are concepts that arise more often in criminal rather than civil proceedings. The two concepts were defined and distinguished in Sansregret v. The Queen, 1985 CanLII 79 (SCC), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 570 at para. 22: Wilful blindness is distinct from recklessness because, while recklessness involves knowledge of a danger or risk and persistence in a course of conduct which creates a risk that the prohibited result will occur, wilful blindness arises where a person who has become aware of the need for some inquiry declines to make the inquiry because he does not wish to know the truth. He would prefer to remain ignorant. The culpability in recklessness is justified by consciousness of the risk and by proceeding in the face of it, while in wilful blindness it is justified by the accused’s fault in deliberately failing to inquire when he knows there is reason for inquiry.
"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 case law on the re-opening of a plaintiff’s case in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that "balance" must be considered in the context of the application? (British Columbia, Canada)
How has consent or court approval been considered in the context of medical malpractice cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
When considering a long-term mental health case, is it possible for the court to consider a single clinical record? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a Workers’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal case, is there any case law that supports the argument that there is no case law in favour of a claim under the Employment Benefits Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
In an aboriginal rights and title case, how have the courts considered expert evidence in aboriginal cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts considered the meaning of s. 35(4)(b)(b) of the BC Code of Civil Procedure in the context of a modification of restrictive covenants? (British Columbia, Canada)
How has the writ of habeas corpus been interpreted in the context of a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What factors will be considered in assessing the credibility of a plaintiff's evidence in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the consequences of recklessness and wilful blindness? (British Columbia, Canada)
