Sunday, December 11, 2011

Ottawa Social Host Liability Lawyers - Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP - Can I be held liable when hosting a holiday party?

Ottawa Social Host Liability Lawyers - Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP.

During the holiday season, people tend to socialize more and drink more alcohol. Unfortunately, there also tends to be more people drinking and driving. As a home owner (or tenant) hosting a holiday party or any other get together where alcohol is supplied , the question becomes whether there is exposure to liability if someone drinks at your home and then drives drunk. Can the home owner or host be held responsible should the drunk driver injure or kill someone. The answer in short is – absolutely yes. The area of law surrounding this issue is called social host liability. As an Ottawa personal injury law firm, we often receive calls from persons concerned about social host liability. The inquiries focus around the home owner wanting to host a party where alcohol will be served, what the responsibilities of a host are and what the risks are.

If you serve alcohol at your home, whether at a party or just a friendly gathering, there is always risk. The risk increases with knowledge and the amount of drinking involved. If you are aware that someone who attended your home has become intoxicated and is unable to drive, you arguably have a legal obligation to try and stop that person even if that involves calling 911. If the person becomes intoxicated at your home, drives and injures someone else, you can be held liable under the social host liability principles.

As Ottawa Accident Lawyers - Ottawa Social Host Liability Lawyers, we urge you to drink responsibly. If you drink, simply do not drive. If someone wants to drive drunk, safely stop them from driving. Planning is important. There are options: have a designated driver, take the bus, call a cab, call a friend, stay over night, call Operation Red Nose, call Responsible Choice.

For legal advice in personal injury issues, call us for a free consultation. Ottawa Social Host Lawyers, Ottawa Injury Lawyer. 613-563-1131.

Friday, December 9, 2011

Winter Accidents and Personal Injury Claims - Ottawa Winter Injury Lawyers

Winter Accidents and Personal Injury Claims - Ottawa Winter Injury Lawyers

Winter can be a particularly perilous time, especially in locations where ice is likely to form. Snow and ice are very difficult to cope with at the best of times; however, this problem is made worse by poorly gritted, salted or managed areas.

All owners and occupiers of property, including private property owners, business owners, government property managers etc... have a duty to ensure their property is well managed and safe for use. Ice and snow must be removed or made safe. Winter injury claims can arise through a variety of circumstance - slip on ice - slip on snow - cat accidents and you could be entitled to compensation if you have slipped and injured yourself as a result of ice or snow that should have been properly dealt with by the property owner.

If you have slipped on ice or sustained an injury caused by snow and winter conditions that could have been avoided by a property owner, you may have a case to advance a claim for compensation. Call us at 613-563-1131 or 613-315-4878 for a free consultation. We accept injury cases on a no fee until you win basis. Ottawa Accident and Injury lawyers. Marc Nicholas Quinn, winter accident lawyer.

Friday, November 4, 2011

What does No Fee Until You Win basis - contingency fee based legal services mean? Ottawa car accident and personal injury lawyers explain.

What does No Fee Until You Win basis - contingency fee based legal services mean? Ottawa car accident and personal injury lawyers explain.

Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP is law firm comprised of lawyers and law clerks who are dedicated to helping persons injured in accidents. We use our own funds and resources to advance the interests of our clients. Personal injury cases can be very expensive to pursue. It can sometimes costs tens of thousands of dollars or even more than a hundred thousand dollars to pursue a claim. At our Ottawa injury law firm, we handle personal injury cases on a No Fee Until You Win basis, called contingency fee based legal services. We provide you with access to justice that you might otherwise not be able to afford.

What does no contingency fee based legal services mean? It means that our personal injury lawyers will not charge you an hourly rate for our personal injury legal services. Instead, our lawyers will be paid a percentage of any recovery that may result from a settlement, award, or judgment. With a contingency fee based agreement, our lawyers are paid only if they obtain a settlement, award, or judgment for you. As well, our law firm will wait until the resolution of your injury case to recover disbursements and expenses such as expert fees, court costs, medical costs etc...

At our Ottawa accident and injury law firm, our lawyers believe that the inability to pay a lawyer should not prevent anyone from obtaining legal advice and so we offer free consultations. Our lawyers have a high rate of success in obtaining significant fair compensation for our clients. Our expertise is built on many years of experience handling all types of accident and injury cases across Ontario.

If you or someone you care about has been injured in a car accident, trip and fall, slip and fall, dog bite or attack incident, or injured any other way due to someone else’s carelessness, please feel free to call us for a free consultation. Let one of our personal injury lawyers explain your rights to you and provide you with a free assessment of your case. Call us at 613-315-4878.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

How to hire an Ottawa car accident lawyer? Ottawa mva lawyer

How to hire an Ottawa car accident lawyer? Your Ottawa MVA lawyers.

YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

Most car accident victims have immediate questions about their potential car accident claim. The process with us starts by answering your initial general questions and concerns, free of charge. We willingly provide free legal advice. All of your specific legal questions are also answered by one of our car accident lawyers. We explain the entire claims for compensation process from beginning to end.

EVALUATION PERFORMED

As part of the process, one of our experienced car accident lawyers will gather all the relevant information needed to complete an initial evaluation of your case for you. In general terms, the evaluation will include our initial view in your chances of winning your case, the various damages and compensation you may be entitled to receive, the various steps needed to succeed in your case and the length of time your car accident case will likely take to complete.

OPTIONS EXPLAINED

We will of course review the particular needs of you and your family and consider the facts of your case specifically. We will provide you with our opinion about your traffic or auto accident case. Also, we will explain and discuss all of your options with you, explaining the risks and benefits of each option.

ADVICE

Our Ottawa mva lawyers will provide you with reliable and experienced legal advice and discuss wit you what we believe is your best course of action. You can choose to hire us as your expert car accident lawyers. We will discuss how to retain us and discuss our no fee until you settle guaranty.

HIRE US

In retaining us, we immediately assign a team of lawyers, paralegals and law clerks to advance your interests and protect your rights. We will keep you informed of each step in the entire process of handling your car accident case.

SETTLE YOUR CAR ACCIDENT CLAIM

Finally, we will settle your case and obtain fair compensation for your injuries.

Ottawa car accident, mva, motor vehicle accident lawyers. Marc Quinn. 613-315-4878.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Geographic Areas - Injury and Accident Lawyers

At Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, Accident and Injury Lawyers, we service all of Ontario. No case is too big or small. We handle them all.

All of Ontario... and

Ottawa personal injury lawyers
Greater Ottawa Area
Ajax personal injury lawyers
Alexandria personal injury lawyers
Almonte personal injury lawyers
Arnprior personal injury lawyers
Athens personal injury lawyers
Belleville personal injury lawyers
Bobcaygeon personal injury lawyers
Brockville personal injury lawyers
Carleton Place personal injury lawyers
Casselman personal injury lawyers
Chesterville personal injury lawyers
Clarence Creek personal injury lawyers
Cobourg personal injury lawyers
Cornwall personal injury lawyers
Deep River personal injury lawyers
Embrun personal injury lawyers
Eganville personal injury lawyers
Frontanac personal injury lawyers
Gananogue personal injury lawyers
Hastings personal injury lawyers
Hawkesbury personal injury lawyers
Horton personal injury lawyers
Kanata personal injury lawyers
Kemptville personal injury lawyers
Kingston personal injury lawyers
Laurential Hill personal injury lawyers
L’Orignal personal injury lawyers
Markham personal injury lawyers
Merickville personal injury lawyers
Metcalfe personal injury lawyers
Morrisburg personal injury lawyers
Napanee personal injury lawyers
Newmarket personal injury lawyers
North Dundas personal injury lawyers
North Glengarry personal injury lawyers
North Gower personal injury lawyers
North Grenville personal injury lawyers
North Stormont personal injury lawyers
Nothumberland personal injury lawyers
Odessa personal injury lawyers
Osgoode personal injury lawyers
Oshawa personal injury lawyers
Pembroke personal injury lawyers
Petawawa personal injury lawyers
Perth personal injury lawyers
Peterborough personal injury lawyers
Pickering personal injury lawyers
Picton personal injury lawyers
Port Hope personal injury lawyers
Prescott personal injury lawyers
Quinte West personal injury lawyers
Renfrew personal injury lawyers
Richmond personal injury lawyers
Rockland personal injury lawyers
Russell personal injury lawyers
Smith Falls personal injury lawyers
South Dundas personal injury lawyers
South Glengarry personal injury lawyers
South Stormont personal injury lawyers
Tay Valley personal injury lawyers
Toronto personal injury lawyers
Trenton personal injury lawyers
Tweed personal injury lawyers
Vaughan personal injury lawyers
Westport personal injury lawyers
Winchester personal injury lawyers

and all cities, communities, districts, municipalities, regions, towns, townships and villages in between.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Negligence Act - Ottawa Accident Lawyers

Ottawa Accident Lawyers - Accident Lawyers - Slip and Fall Lawyers - Trip and Fall Lawyers -- Negligence Lawyers - 613-563-1131

Negligence Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER N.1


Extent of liability, remedy over

1.  Where damages have been caused or contributed to by the fault or neglect of two or more persons, the court shall determine the degree in which each of such persons is at fault or negligent, and, where two or more persons are found at fault or negligent, they are jointly and severally liable to the person suffering loss or damage for such fault or negligence, but as between themselves, in the absence of any contract express or implied, each is liable to make contribution and indemnify each other in the degree in which they are respectively found to be at fault or negligent. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 1.

Recovery as between tortfeasors

2.  A tortfeasor may recover contribution or indemnity from any other tortfeasor who is, or would if sued have been, liable in respect of the damage to any person suffering damage as a result of a tort by settling with the person suffering such damage, and thereafter commencing or continuing action against such other tortfeasor, in which event the tortfeasor settling the damage shall satisfy the court that the amount of the settlement was reasonable, and in the event that the court finds the amount of the settlement was excessive it may fix the amount at which the claim should have been settled. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 2.

Plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence

3.  In any action for damages that is founded upon the fault or negligence of the defendant if fault or negligence is found on the part of the plaintiff that contributed to the damages, the court shall apportion the damages in proportion to the degree of fault or negligence found against the parties respectively. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 3.

Where parties to be deemed equally at fault

4.  If it is not practicable to determine the respective degree of fault or negligence as between any parties to an action, such parties shall be deemed to be equally at fault or negligent. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 4.

Adding parties

5.  Wherever it appears that a person not already a party to an action is or may be wholly or partly responsible for the damages claimed, such person may be added as a party defendant to the action upon such terms as are considered just or may be made a third party to the action in the manner prescribed by the rules of court for adding third parties. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 5.

Jury to determine degrees of negligence of parties

6.  In any action tried with a jury, the degree of fault or negligence of the respective parties is a question of fact for the jury. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 6.

When plaintiff may be liable for costs

7.  Where the damages are occasioned by the fault or negligence of more than one party, the court has power to direct that the plaintiff shall bear some portion of the costs if the circumstances render this just. R.S.O. 1990, c. N.1, s. 7.

Ottawa Accident Lawyers - Accident Lawyers - Slip and Fall Lawyers - Trip and Fall Lawyers -- 613-563-1131

Ottawa Accident Lawyers - Accident Lawyers - Slip and Fall Lawyers - Trip and Fall Lawyers -- 613-563-1131


Occupiers’ Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER O.2


Definitions
1.In this Act,
“occupier” includes,
(a) a person who is in physical possession of premises, or
(b) a person who has responsibility for and control over the condition of premises or the activities there carried on, or control over persons allowed to enter the premises,
despite the fact that there is more than one occupier of the same premises; (“occupant”)
“premises” means lands and structures, or either of them, and includes,
(a) water,
(b) ships and vessels,
(c) trailers and portable structures designed or used for residence, business or shelter,
(d) trains, railway cars, vehicles and aircraft, except while in operation. (“lieux”) R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 1.

Common law duty of care superseded

2.Subject to section 9, this Act applies in place of the rules of the common law that determine the care that the occupier of premises at common law is required to show for the purpose of determining the occupier’s liability in law in respect of dangers to persons entering on the premises or the property brought on the premises by those persons. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 2.

Occupier’s duty

3.(1)An occupier of premises owes a duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that persons entering on the premises, and the property brought on the premises by those persons are reasonably safe while on the premises.

Idem

(2)The duty of care provided for in subsection (1) applies whether the danger is caused by the condition of the premises or by an activity carried on on the premises.

Idem

(3)The duty of care provided for in subsection (1) applies except in so far as the occupier of premises is free to and does restrict, modify or exclude the occupier’s duty. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 3.

Risks willingly assumed

4.(1)The duty of care provided for in subsection 3 (1) does not apply in respect of risks willingly assumed by the person who enters on the premises, but in that case the occupier owes a duty to the person to not create a danger with the deliberate intent of doing harm or damage to the person or his or her property and to not act with reckless disregard of the presence of the person or his or her property.

Criminal activity

(2)A person who is on premises with the intention of committing, or in the commission of, a criminal act shall be deemed to have willingly assumed all risks and is subject to the duty of care set out in subsection (1).

Trespass and permitted recreational activity

(3)A person who enters premises described in subsection (4) shall be deemed to have willingly assumed all risks and is subject to the duty of care set out in subsection (1),

(a) where the entry is prohibited under the Trespass to Property Act;
(b) where the occupier has posted no notice in respect of entry and has not otherwise expressly permitted entry; or
(c) where the entry is for the purpose of a recreational activity and,
(i) no fee is paid for the entry or activity of the person, other than a benefit or payment received from a government or government agency or a non-profit recreation club or association, and
(ii) the person is not being provided with living accommodation by the occupier.
Premises referred to in subs. (3)
(4)The premises referred to in subsection (3) are,
(a) a rural premises that is,
(i) used for agricultural purposes, including land under cultivation, orchards, pastures, woodlots and farm ponds,
(ii) vacant or undeveloped premises,
(iii) forested or wilderness premises;
(b) golf courses when not open for playing;
(c) utility rights-of-way and corridors, excluding structures located thereon;
(d) unopened road allowances;
(e) private roads reasonably marked by notice as such; and
(f) recreational trails reasonably marked by notice as such. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 4.

Restriction of duty or liability

5.(1)The duty of an occupier under this Act, or the occupier’s liability for breach thereof, shall not be restricted or excluded by any contract to which the person to whom the duty is owed is not a party, whether or not the occupier is bound by the contract to permit such person to enter or use the premises.

Extension of liability by contract

(2)A contract shall not by virtue of this Act have the effect, unless it expressly so provides, of making an occupier who has taken reasonable care, liable to any person not a party to the contract, for dangers due to the faulty execution of any work of construction, maintenance or repair, or other like operation by persons other than the occupier, employees of the occupier and persons acting under the occupier’s direction and control.

Reasonable steps to inform

(3)Where an occupier is free to restrict, modify or exclude the occupier’s duty of care or the occupier’s liability for breach thereof, the occupier shall take reasonable steps to bring such restriction, modification or exclusion to the attention of the person to whom the duty is owed. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 5.

Liability where independent contractor

6.(1)Where damage to any person or his or her property is caused by the negligence of an independent contractor employed by the occupier, the occupier is not on that account liable if in all the circumstances the occupier had acted reasonably in entrusting the work to the independent contractor, if the occupier had taken such steps, if any, as the occupier reasonably ought in order to be satisfied that the contractor was competent and that the work had been properly done, and if it was reasonable that the work performed by the independent contractor should have been undertaken.

Idem

(2)Where there is more than one occupier of premises, any benefit accruing by reason of subsection (1) to the occupier who employed the independent contractor shall accrue to all occupiers of the premises.

Idem

(3)Nothing in this section affects any duty of the occupier that is non-delegable at common law or affects any provision in any other Act that provides that an occupier is liable for the negligence of an independent contractor. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 6.

Application of ss. 5 (1, 2), 6

7.In so far as subsections 5 (1) and (2) prevent the duty of care owed by an occupier, or liability for breach thereof, from being restricted or excluded, they apply to contracts entered into both before and after the commencement of this Act, and in so far as section 6 enlarges the duty of care owed by an occupier, or liability for breach thereof, it applies only in respect of contracts entered into after the 8th day of September, 1980. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 7.
Obligations of landlord as occupier

8.(1)Where premises are occupied or used by virtue of a tenancy under which the landlord is responsible for the maintenance or repair of the premises, it is the duty of the landlord to show towards any person or the property brought on the premises by those persons, the same duty of care in respect of dangers arising from any failure on the landlord’s part in carrying out the landlord’s responsibility as is required by this Act to be shown by an occupier of the premises.

Idem

(2)For the purposes of this section, a landlord shall not be deemed to have made default in carrying out any obligation to a person unless the landlord’s default is such as to be actionable at the suit of the person entitled to possession of the premises.

Definitions

(3)For the purposes of this section, obligations imposed by any enactment by virtue of a tenancy shall be treated as imposed by the tenancy, and “tenancy” includes a statutory tenancy, an implied tenancy and any contract conferring the right of occupation, and “landlord” shall be construed accordingly.

Application of section

(4)This section applies to all tenancies whether created before or after the commencement of this Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 8.

Preservation of higher obligations

9.(1)Nothing in this Act relieves an occupier of premises in any particular case from any higher liability or any duty to show a higher standard of care that in that case is incumbent on the occupier by virtue of any enactment or rule of law imposing special liability or standards of care on particular classes of persons including, but without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the obligations of,
(a) innkeepers, subject to the Innkeepers Act;
(b) common carriers;
(c) bailees.

Employer and employee relationships

(2)Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the rights, duties and liabilities resulting from an employer and employee relationship where it exists.

Application of Negligence Act

(3)The Negligence Act applies with respect to causes of action to which this Act applies. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 9.

Act binds Crown

10.(1)This Act binds the Crown, subject to the Proceedings Against the Crown Act.

Exception

(2)This Act does not apply to the Crown or to any municipal corporation, where the Crown or the municipal corporation is an occupier of a public highway or a public road. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 10.

Application of Act

11.This Act does not affect rights and liabilities of persons in respect of causes of action arising before the 8th day of September, 1980. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2, s. 11.
____________________

University of Ottawa Heart Institute Gala Art Exhibition 2011

University of Ottawa Heart Institute Gala Art Exhibition 2011

The Ottawa personal injury law firm of Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP were pleased to be a proud golden sponsor of the University of Ottawa Heart Institute Gala Art Exhibition 2011 which took place on October 18, 2011 at Ottawa City Hall. Thank you to well known Artist, Marcia Lea and to Sandra Sauk of Triangle Investigation Agency Ltd. who generously planned and coordinated the well attended event. Marc Quinn - Ottawa Car Accident Lawyer - 613-563-1131.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

What is a duty of care? Ottawa Accident Lawyers

In tort law, a duty of care is a legal obligation imposed on an individual requiring that they adhere to a standard of reasonable care while performing any acts that could foreseeably harm others. It is the first element that must be established to proceed with an action in negligence. The claimant must be able to show a duty of care imposed by law which the defendant has breached. In turn, breaching a duty may subject an individual to liability. The duty of care may be imposed by operation of law between individuals with no current direct relationship (familial or contractual or otherwise), but eventually become related in some manner, as defined by common law (meaning case law).
Duty of care may be considered a formalization of the social contract, the implicit responsibilities held by individuals towards others within society. It is not a requirement that a duty of care be defined by law, though it will often develop through the jurisprudence of common law. Wikipedia

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Ottawa Dog Bite Lawyer - Dog Owner's Liability Act -Dog Bite and Dog Attack Liability in Ontario - By Marc-Nicholas Quinn, Ottawa Accident Lawyer

Dog Bite and Dog Attack Liability in Ontario
By: Marc-Nicholas Quinn, Ottawa Personal Injury Lawyer

This article addresses many of the issues surrounding dogs and liability in the context of the law in Ontario as it exists in 2011 and will provide you with valuable information about dogs and liability, no matter which side of the leash you are on.

It is said that dogs are a person's best friend. They are always there for us, for protection, for care and love. However, in a single bite, the lives of countless people have forever been profoundly changed. Dogs can be extremely loyal, loving and caring pets. Despite the close relationship between dogs and humans, dogs can cause serious injury, permanent physical and emotional scaring and in some cases, dog bites or attacks can be fatal. Dogs of all sizes and breeds are capable of seriously harming or killing human beings. Even the most timid dogs can bite or attack.

There is considerable debate as to whether or not certain breeds of dogs are more dangerous than others and more likely to bite or attack. This has resulted in certain protective legislation targeting certain breeds. For instance, in Ontario, with few exceptions, pit bulls are banned pursuant to the Dog Owners' Liability Act and Public Safety Related to Dog Statute Amendment Act, 2005. Regardless of the size or breed of dog, owners have legal responsibilities to their pets as well as to any person, pet or property that may come into contact with their dog. Dog owners should be aware of their legal responsibilities and the risks involved in ownership.

Any person injured as a result of a dog in Ontario is entitled to seek compensation. This article addresses, in a general way, the legal rights and interests of victims of dog bites and dog attacks.

What happens when a dog bites and injures someone? In most cases, dog owners are financially and legally responsible for any injury or property damage their pets cause. In most, but not all, cases, the dog owner's home insurance policy will cover the damages. If your dog bites or attacks someone, you can, in some cases, lose your dog or your homeowner's or renter's insurance. If you lose your insurance coverage with your current insurer, you may not be able to obtain coverage from any other insurance company. If you own a dog and haven't looked at your policy, it's a good idea to get out your policy and review the fine print.

If your dog bites and injures someone, you could end up paying significant monetary damages. Even if your dog doesn't have a history of biting, attacks or vicious behavior, you can nevertheless be held liable. It is prudent to verify with your insurance agent or insurance company annually to ensure you have appropriate insurance coverage.

In the past, the law as it pertained to protecting victims of dog bites and attacks was limited. Victims of dog bites or attacks could only rely on the general principles of common law (judge made law as opposed to legislation) and an ancient doctrine of law called scienter (in English, meaning “foreknowledge”). In order to successfully obtain fair compensation, victims had to establish clear negligence on the part of the dog owner, using general principles of negligence law. Scienter required the victim to identify the dog, identify the dog owner and prove the dog owner knew their dog had a propensity to bite or attack.

Today, things are very different and the onus is now on dog owners to show why they should not be held responsible to pay compensation to dog bite injury victims.


Statutory Obligations and Liability - Strict Liability

Ontario law places strict liability on owners of dogs for any injuries causes by their pets.

If you have been bitten, attacked or otherwise injured by a dog in Ontario, you have certain rights and remedies available to you through the various legal principles that apply to dogs and their owners.

In terms of statutory provisions, the relevant provincial law is as follows:

The law in Ontario for dog bites is governed by the Dog Owners’ Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter D.16 ("DOLA").

The DOLA states that it is the owner of the dog who is liable and the liability is held to a strict standard. Pursuant to the cases (case law) that have interpreted and applied the provisions of the DOLA, dog owners are strictly liable for any damage or injury caused by their dogs.

Strict liability is the legal responsibility for damages, or injury, even if the person found strictly liable was not at fault or negligent. If you are injured by a dog, you generally do not need to prove the intent, negligence or fault of the dog owner. Liability will be found even if the dog owner acted completely reasonably.

What does this mean? In simple terms, if you are injured by a dog, you need to identify the dog owner, prove that their dog injured you and then, the dog owner is automatically responsible to pay you damages. The amount of damages is assessed by the Court. If the case settles prior to trial or prior to a Court action having been commenced, the amount is determined on the basis of legal research completed by your personal injury lawyer. A personal injury lawyer can provide a range of monetary damages within which a settlement would be reasonable.

In some cases, the amount of the damages an injured person is awarded can be reduced because of contributory negligence. This occurs when the Court believes that the injured person acted in such a way to make them partially responsible for the dog bite or attack injury. This only occurs in some cases and usually involves incidences where the victim for whatever reason unreasonably provoked the dog in some way to behave violently.

The finding and extent of contributory negligence is wholly dependent upon the circumstances of each individual case. The incident in question would be reviewed to determine if the dog attack victim provoked the dog in some way. In cases of children being injured, the analysis is based on whether or not the child's parent or guardian failed to properly supervise the child, and also if the child unreasonably provoked the dog. In most cases, there is no contributory negligence found.

There is a general overriding obligation on dog owners to ensure that their dogs behave safely and do not injure others. Section 5.1 of the DOLA provides that “each owner of a dog shall exercise reasonable precautions to prevent it from biting or attacking a person or domestic animal; or behaving in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or domestic animals.”

In terms of civil liability, section 2 of the DOLA provides that the owner of a dog is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal. Where there is more than one owner of a dog, they are jointly and severally liable under this section.

A person injured by a dog does not need to prove that the owner of the dog knew their animal was dangerous. Section 3 of the DOLA provides, in part, for the extent of the liability of dog owners. Section 3 states, in part, as follows: “The liability of the owner does not depend upon knowledge of the propensity of the dog or fault or negligence on the part of the owner.”


In some cases, the injured person's damages can be reduced if the dog owner can establish that the injured person acted unreasonably. Section 3 of the DOLA further states that “the Court shall reduce the damages awarded in proportion to the degree, if any, to which the fault or negligence of the plaintiff caused or contributed to the damages.” It is rare to see damages reduced under this provision.


Ottawa City By-Law Respecting Animal Care and Control - BY-LAW NO. 2003 - 77

Most municipalities have by-laws respecting animals, including dogs. For instance, the City of Ottawa has a general by-law respecting the obligations of dog owners. It is called "A by-law of the City of Ottawa respecting animal care and control." The by-law places a general onus on dog owners to ensure that their dogs do not bite or otherwise injure persons in Ottawa. It also imposes the obligation on all dog owners to maintain control of their dogs at all times and to keep them on leashes except for specified areas. All dogs must be registered with the municipality. The by-law provides for sanctions and penalties to anyone who breaches the provisions of the by-law.


Pit Bulls

Special legislation was enacted in 2005 to specifically deal with pit bulls in Ontario. In 2005, the Public Safety Related to Dogs Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005 was passed along with Ontario Regulation 157/05 which provides for the strict regulation and control of pit bull ownership and management in Ontario. With few exceptions for those who already owned pit bulls in 2005, the law now prohibits persons from owning, breeding, importing, abandoning or transferring pit bulls. Training pit bulls to fight or allowing them to stray is illegal. All owners of pit bulls must comply with the new regulation for pit bulls under the DOLA and the Regulation. For more detailed information visit http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca.


Dog Owner’s Liability Act versus Occupier’s Liability Act

There may be situations where the Court finds that the injuries sustained by the victim are not caused by a “bite” or “attack”. Section 2 of the DOLA makes it a pre-requisite that the dog must bite or attack someone in order for the DOLA to apply. In the unusual case of the Court finding that a victim was not injured as a result of a bite or attack, the Court may nevertheless apply general negligence principles to hold the dog owner liable. The Court, in particular, can apply the provisions of the Occupier’s Liability Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.O.2 to hold the dog owner liable not as a dog owner per se but as a property owner; providing the incident occurred at the dog owner’s real property, premises or home. Section 3(1) of the Occupier’s Liability Act provides that: “An occupier of premises owes a duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that persons entering on the premises, and the property brought on the premises by those persons are reasonably safe while on the premises.” Therefore, if someone is injured by a dog but it is not by a bite or an attack, liability can nevertheless be found either in general negligence, or under the provisions of the Occupier’s Liability Act.


Can someone other than a dog owner also be held liable?

Yes. An owner of a dog can in certain circumstances, prove, that someone else contributed to the incident and seek that the other person partially or fully indemnifies them for the compensation /damages they are ordered to pay an injured person.

If the victim is able to prove that the property owner, aside from the dog owner, exercised control over and assumed responsibility over the property and/or the dog, the victim can pursue a claim for compensation against the property owner, in addition to the dog owner.

Section 3 of the DOLA further states, in part, as follows: “An owner who is liable to pay damages is entitled to recover contribution and indemnity from any other person in proportion to the degree to which the other person’s fault or negligence caused or contributed to the damages.” This provision does apply in certain circumstances. Examples of where this provision would apply include, cases where there is more than one dog involved in the incident (i.e. two dogs with two different owners attacked someone), where there is more than one owner of the dog that caused the injury (i.e. joint owners of dog) or there is a third party, such as a negligent property owner or landlord, who may have contributed to the dangerous circumstances. An example of this would be a landlord allowing dangerous dogs on their rented property or ‘harbourers’ of dogs such as puppy mills or kennel owners.


Who is considered a dog owner?

It is useful to understand that a dog owner is broadly defined in the DOLA. Section 1 of the DOLA defines dog owner as including any "person who possesses or harbours a dog and, where the owner is a minor, the person responsible for the custody of the minor." Therefore, if you are entrusted to care for a dog for anyone else (i.e. baby-sitting a dog), you will be considered as an owner (i.e. harboring a dog) and can be held liable for damages arising out of any injuries sustained by someone from the dog under your care.

The issue of how owners of real property, in particular, landlords, can become liable for damages in dog bite or attack cases, even though the injuries sustained by the victim were caused by someone else's dog, in particular, a tenants, is subject to considerable debate and the law in this area is likely to expand.


Criminal Acts and Dogs

There is an exception to the strict liability imposed on dog owners in cases where their dog attacks a person committing a crime on their property. Section 3 of the DOLA provides that “where a person is on premises with the intention of committing, or in the commission of, a criminal act on the premises and incurs damage caused by being bitten or attacked by a dog, the owner is not liable ... unless the keeping of the dog on the premises was unreasonable for the purpose of the protection of persons or property.”

The law does also provide some special protection for certain governmental agencies and their employees (i.e., police officers, border patrol officers, etc...) who utilize dogs in the apprehension of criminal suspects or in the investigation of crimes. In such cases, it is much more difficult for the victim to claim compensation.


What to do if you have been bitten or attacked by a dog?

If you are bitten or attacked by a dog in Ontario, aside from firstly obtaining immediate medical attention, the second thing you should do is identify and obtain the name of the dog owner. The dog owner is the person at fault for the dog bite or attack incident and liable to pay damages.

In some cases, obtaining the identity of the dog owner is simple because you already know the owner (the incident occurred at a friend or family member's home). However, in some cases, identifying the dog owner can prove problematic; the incident may have occurred in a public place, occurred in the absence of a dog owner (loose dog), an escaped dog or by a dog you do not recognize. In some cases, the dog owner may attempt to evade the location of the incident in order to hide his or her identity. In every case, the local police department, local health department and local by-law enforcement should be immediately notified. These governmental agencies may be able to assist in locating the dog and its owner.

With respect to seeking medical attention, a person bitten by any animal can be exposed to serious risk. All animals potentially carry parvovirus or rabies virus. Always consult a physician immediately after being bitten. A bite victim may also suffer serious bacterial infections, including one of the bone called osteomyelitis which can become life threatening if untreated. This is possible whether or not the animal has parvovirus or rabies virus. Always advise the local health department of a dog bite or attack.

It is very important to, as best as possible, obtain the names and contact particulars of any witnesses. It is not uncommon for dog owners to deny the incident for fear of being liable to pay significant damages. Independent witnesses can be very useful in such cases.

Also, it is crucial to obtain photographs of the injuries as soon as possible after the time of attack. It is also important to take photographs over time to show the stages of healing and document the permanency of any injuries such as scarring.

It is very important that the medical treatment you receive is well documented and that the records reflect treatment as a result of a dog bite or attack. You should advise your health care providers that your injuries are a result of a dog bite or attack and that their notes will be requested by your personal injury lawyer.

Keeping a daily record of how the incident and injuries have affected you is also a good idea. You should address the diary to your lawyer so that solicitor and client privilege may be claimed to protect the contents of the diary from having to be disclosed to the dog owner and their lawyer or insurer.

It is always prudent to consult with a personal injury lawyer experienced in dealing with dog bite or attack liability cases. The earlier you do so the better. Your personal injury lawyer can provide assistance with any by-law offence issues arising from the incident. It is not uncommon for the dog owner to be charged under local by-laws and be prosecuted under local by-laws as well as the Provincial Offences Act. It is also common for plea deals to be negotiated and your personal injury lawyer can intervene, speak to the investigators and provincial or local prosecutor and seek that the charges proceed to a trial.

Your personal injury lawyer can also take immediate steps to protect your interests such as notifying the dog owner and anyone else at fault of your intention to seek compensation. Your personal injury lawyer can also secure photographs and witness statements. In the event the dog owner is not identified, your personal injury lawyer can also assist in locating the dog owner through the use of investigative techniques.

It is important to note that it is prudent to consult a personal injury lawyer at any point following the dog bite or attack incident, even months later. You can claim compensation even months later. However, there is a statutory time limit by which you can forever be barred from advancing a claim.


Limitation Period - Can I lose my right to sue?

At the time of writing this article (2011), the limitation period by which a right to seek compensation through a Court action, expires 2 years from the date of the dog bite incident.

If you do not commence a legal proceeding within the time period prescribed by law, your right to make that claim is forever lost. Even the very best claim disappears simply because of the expiry of that period of time. This time period is called a limitation period. It is also often called a prescription period.


Can someone receive compensation if the dog attack did not result in a bite or where there was no physical contact with the dog - emotional trauma?

The Courts have clearly stated that in order for the provisions of the DOLA to apply or for damages to be awarded, there need not be an actual bite or physical contact with a dog. If a dog causes injury, be it physically, psychologically or emotionally, the victim can nevertheless receive compensation regardless of whether or not the dog actually bit or attacked the victim. Also, the Court has awarded damages in cases where a dog has caused physical injuries to another dog. Damages have been awarded for pain and suffering, emotional trauma, emotional suffering, emotional distress, nervous shock, injury to health, loss of amenities of life, loss of enjoyment, personal inconvenience, medical expenses, loss of income, loss of competitive advantage, loss of business opportunity and other special and general losses.



Who is financially responsible to pay damages arising from a dog bite injury claim ?

All dog owners should understand their potential liability in the event their dog bites, mauls or, heaven forbid, kills someone. Even a single bite or dog attack can cost a dog owner tens of thousands of dollars. Litigation alone (aside from any award of compensation) can cost tens of thousands of dollars, sometimes as much as one hundred thousand dollars. Insurance coverage might not apply in every case. In some jurisdictions, if the dog bite or attack is especially serious, the dog owner may be incarcerated and spend time in jail. Criminal charges, although relatively rare, can be advanced in cases where the dog attack was particularly severe and the owner is judged to have been unreasonably careless or grossly negligent (see section 18 of the DOLA which provides for incarceration of up to 6 months).

The dog owner and anyone else found responsible for the injuries sustained by the victim will be held liable to pay the damages. However, in many circumstances, the damages (compensation) are a covered loss under many home owners insurance policies. This is true in many cases regardless of whether the incident occurred at home or elsewhere. Care should be made to review the policy however as each policy is different. Accordingly, the compensation will be paid by the insurance company in most cases.

If you are a dog owner and have been notified of a claim, the notice should be immediately provided to your insurer. Failure to provide prompt notice or steps taken without the consultation with the insurer which prejudices the insurer may result in coverage being denied, in which case, the compensation will need to be paid personally.

In many cases, even bankruptcy will not absolve a dog owner from paying compensation as there are provisions in the Federal Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act which makes these types of awards exempt from being excused in discharge from bankruptcy.


Monetary Damages

In Ontario, there are generally two types of damages, damages that can be calculated (pecuniary damages) and damages that cannot be calculated (non-pecuniary damages). The type of damages an injured person is entitled to receive depends on the circumstances of each case. However, the damages can include general damages for pain and suffering (non pecuniary damages), various types of special damages such as out of pocket expenses (pecuniary damages), loss of income, loss of business opportunity, loss of competitive advantage, medical expenses, rehabilitation expenses and home care expenses, loss of care, guidance and companionship.


Quasi-Criminal Sanctions and Non-Monetary Remedies

The DOLA and the single regulation enacted pursuant to the DOLA (Ontario Regulation 157/05 – Pit Bulls Regulation) deal almost exclusively with the regulation of dangerous dogs at the provincial level. For the most part, the DOLA addresses non civil issues relating to dogs and concentrates in quasi-criminal issues and the prosecution of dog owners under the Ontario Provincial Offences Act.

Under the DOLA and local by-laws, a Court can order a dog owner to take certain specified precautionary steps to better control their dog (such as a muzzle order) or even order the destruction of the dog. The specific order or orders will depend on the circumstances of the case such as what the dog has done and the consequences thereof and on the dog owner’s conduct or lack thereof. The Court will be concerned with the safety and protection of the victim and also of the public at large.

The DOLA contains a very vaguely-worded statutory provision which provides the Court with significant discretion when dealing with serious dog attack or bite cases. Section 4(3)(b) of the DOLA states that the Court may order a dog owner to “take the measures specified in the order for the more effective control of the dog or for purposes of public safety.” This is very vague wording and hence means that the Court can make any order it deems necessary in the name of “public safety”. The Court, arguable, can even make a declaration that a person be ineligible to own a dog permanently or for a specified period of time.


Conclusion

The dog bite and dog attack laws in Ontario are now fairly clear. Owners of dogs who injure other persons will, in most cases, be held strictly liable to the victim for damages and will need to pay fair and reasonable financial compensation.

There are many factors which can play a role in dogs attacking or biting someone. They include learned behavior, sickness, pain, fear, fear aggression, dominance behavior, territoriality, reactive aggression, breed, provocation and poor socialization. Whether or not a dog will bite or attack is unpredictable. Even the best owners can have dogs that bite or attack unpredictably.

In every case, the best tool is prevention. In this regard, some good advice for dog owners when it comes to liability for dog attacks and/or bites is to take all steps possible to prevent your dog from injuring others. Properly train and socialize your dog, train and socialize early and consistently. Do not let your dog run at large - run around loose. Recognize triggers and signs of aggressive behavior. Take care when your dog is around strangers, especially children. Post signs on your property warning others that there is a dog on the property. Ensure your dog is in good health with no medical reasons for him to react aggressively because of pain.

For dog owners, the best advice is to become educated on how to be safe in the presence of dogs and to take appropriate precautions. Teach children how to behave around dogs and recognize indicators of dangerous dogs or dangerous situations. For instance, teach children skills such as never pet a dog until it has had a chance to smell you, never disturb a dog who is eating, caring for its puppies or sleeping, never run from a dog and try to avoid eye contact with dogs. Most dog bites or attacks occur between people and dogs that are familiar with one another.

To find out more about your rights and interests in dog bite cases, please contact a personal injury lawyer specializing in dog bite and attacks. At the Ottawa Personal Injury Law Firm of Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, we specialize in dog bite injury cases and have obtained millions of dollars in compensation for our personal injury clients.

If you or someone you love has been involved in a dog bite injury, you have every right to seek damages. If you have suffered injuries because of a dog bite incident occurring on private or commercial property, contact our law office today for a free consultation with an Ontario personal injury lawyer about your legal options. We offer free consultations. We only get paid if we settle your case. Call us at 613-315-4878 or 613-563-1131 (ask for Marc-Nicholas Quinn).

There is no guarantee that your dog will not bite or attacks someone. Even the most responsible owners are at risk of their dog attacking. If your dog bites or attacks someone, we can answer your questions and offer legal advice. We can advise you of your rights, interests and obligations under the law. If you do not have insurance covering the loss, we can defend any claims, court action or prosecution. Call us at 613-315-4878 or 613-563-1131 (ask for Marc-Nicholas Quinn). Visit us at www.pqtlaw.com or www.ottawapersonalinjurylawyernetwork.com.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Marc Nicholas Quinn has practiced personal injury law in Ottawa, Ontario since 1997 and is a founding partner of the Ottawa Law Firm, Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, Ottawa Personal Injury Lawyers. His practice is focused on personal injury, insurance and disability law. He is a trained general mediator, court connected mediator and teaches law at various post-secondary institutions in Ottawa. He is recognized as an experienced and respected lawyer in personal injury law and has extensive experience dealing with dog owner liability issues, both on behalf of dog owners and victims of dog bites and attacks. He has obtained millions of dollars in compensation for his personal injury clients.

LEGAL NOTICE: The views expressed and information provided in this article is not intended to be legal advice in any way and should not be relied on as such. This article is intended to offer general comments and views and is not intended to provide legal opinions. Readers should seek legal advice on the particular issues that concern them. All cases are different and the application of the law to even the slightest set of different facts can result in different legal outcomes. Before any decision is made in relation to your case, you should consult a lawyer. © All Rights Reserved 2011-2012 - Marc Nicholas Quinn, Ottawa Personal Injury Lawyer.

Monday, October 3, 2011

Occupier's Liability Act - ottawa slip and fall lawyers - ottawa trip and fall lawyers

Occupier's Liability Act - ottawa slip and fall lawyers - ottawa trip and fall lawyers

If you have slipped and fallen or tripped and fallen on commercial or private property and suffered an injury, you may be entitled to financial compensation. In Ontario, the law places a duty on all property owners to ensure that people who enter the premises are reasonably safe while they are on the property ( see Occupier's Liability Act). If you slip and fall as a result of a property owner failing to keep their property safe, the owner is responsible for any injuries that you suffer and will be liable to pay compensation.

Slip and falls or trip and falls result from numerous hazardous conditions such as wet floors, icy or wet surfaces, uneven surfaces, broken surfaces, poor lighting, bad design and items on the floor or ground.

Whatever the cause, if you fall and injure yourself as a result of someone else's fault, you are entitled to fair compensation. At the Ottawa Personal Injury Law Firm of Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, we specialize in injury cases and have obtained millions of dollars in compensation for our clients.

If you have suffered injuries because of a slip and fall or trip and fall on private or commercial property, contact our law office today for a free consultation with an Ontario fall injury lawyer about your legal options. We offer free consultations. We only get paid if we settle your case. Call us at 613-315-4878. Marc Nicholas Quinn. Ontario Injury Lawyer.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

What Causes Car Accidents? Country and Rural Roads : by Marc Quinn, Ottawa, Renfrew, Pembroke, Arnprior Car Accident Lawyer

What Causes Car Accidents? Country and Rural Roads : by Marc Quinn, Ottawa, Renfrew, Pembroke, Arnprior Car Accident Lawyer

In most cases, motor vehicle collisions can be avoided. Car accidents are the result of driver behaviour and accidents are unexpected and unforeseen. In some cases, in addition to driver error, there are other contributing factors to motor vehicle accidents such as poor roadway design or inadequate road maintenance. In some cases, municipalities can be held liable at law for accidents. The degree of driver behavior which contributed towards the accident is usually high and include driving under the influence of alcohol or other substances, driving with distractions (cell phones, radio etc..), speeding, aggressive driving or simple inattention. The primary cause of accidents, it seems, is driver behaviour.

Whatever the cause of a car accident, there is usually insurance involved and the rights and interests of those involved in car accidents will vary depending on the circumstances. The type and amount of compensation available for victims of car accidents varies with the circumstances of the accident.

At Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki, Renfrew, Pembroke, Arnprior, Ottawa car accident lawyers, aside from slip and falls and trip and fall cases, the majority of personal injury claims we handle are as a result of motor accidents. One area in particular that causes many motor accidents is country and rural roads. Country roads are particularly dangerous and extra care should always be taken when driving on country roads. Country roads are often single lane roads and are not as well lit as city roads. Also, country roads are particularly susceptible to becoming dangerous in bad weather conditions.

Advancing claims for compensation in cases of accidents on rural or country roads can be difficult and it is advisable to contact a personal injury lawyer to handle the claims on your behalf.

At Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, we have experience dealing with all types of accidents and injuries caused by car accidents. Contact us for a free consultation at 613-315-4878. We take on personal injury cases on a No Fee Unless You Win basis. Visit us at www.pqtlaw.com.