What is the test for determining the existence of a private duty of care owed by a public authority?

The test for determining the existence of a private duty of care owed by a public authority is known as the “Anns/Cooper” test: Cooper v. Hobart, 2001 SCC 79. The test requires a court to address the analysis by considering the following series of questions: 1) Does a sufficiently analogous precedent exist that definitively found the existence or non-existence of a duty of care in these circumstances; If not; 2) Was the harm suffered by the plaintiff reasonably foreseeable; If yes; 3) Was there a relationship of sufficient proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant such that it would be just to impose a duty of care in these circumstances; If yes, a prima facie duty arises; 4) Are there any residual policy reasons for negating the prima facie duty of care established in question/step 3, aside from any policy considerations that arise naturally out of a consideration of proximity. If not, then a novel duty of care is found to exist.

The onus is on the plaintiff to show a prima facie duty of care (through answering questions 1–3, above); but the onus is on the defendant to establish any policy reasons for negating the prima facie duty of care: Childs v. Desormeaux, 2006 SCC 18 at para. 13. Only questions 3 and 4 are in issue on this appeal.