To begin with, such a conclusion is contrary to the principles established in Brown v. British Columbia, whether one takes the approach of Cory J., or the approach of Sopinka J. On the approach of Cory J., even if the power to remove parked automobiles, to facilitate snowclearing, were held to be “a duty” to remove the automobiles, then the obligation of the City would be to do so “in a manner that is not negligent”. There was no evidence before the trial judge that would justify his coming to a conclusion that failure of the City to remove every automobile that hindered removal of snow or ice that might impede or divert the flow of water in a gutter, would amount to negligence on the part of the City. On the approach of Sopinka J., such a statutory provision does not amount to a statutory duty at all, but rather a statutory discretion.
"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.