What is the test for contributory negligence when a plaintiff refuses to sit in the back of a pick-up truck?

The next case cited by counsel for the plaintiffs is Fennellow v. Falez (1993) B.C.J. No. 2445 (B.C.S.C.). There a 15 year old left a biker’s party where older persons were drinking and fighting and the only option available to him was to ride in the back of a pick-up truck. He was found not to be contributorily negligent. He had telephoned home but there was no answer. Had he reached someone at home, he would have asked to be called for. No other relatives were available to call for a lift. It was a 35 to 40 minute drive home from the party house. He had no money for a taxi and the only option to get away with his friends was to ride in the back of the pick-up truck. The court applied the test of whether it was reasonable for a party to elect to sit in a specific location despite the absence of adequate restraints in that location rather than refuse to continue the trip. The court found no contributory negligence.