In Professor Goodrich's Handbook on the Conflict of Laws, Which

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

In Professor Goodrich's Handbook on the Conflict of Laws, Which 389 CONFLICT OF LAWS IN AUTOMOBILE NEGLIGENCE CASES Questions frequently arise in the various provinces of Canada, and no doubt in the various states of the United States, in respect to liability for accidents, in which, for instance, a foreign owned car is involved or the accident happens to a local resident while in a foreign country. This article will treat only of the law of Ontario, but as we enjoy, in common with the other provinces, the benefit of the English common law, including the rules of English private international law, it may be that a review of the situation here will be of more than local, interest. No attempt will be made to -state the law of any of the states of the United States but references will be made to American authorities on some points, which citat'ons may be useful for comparison, if nothing more. The basis for this discussion must rest upon the general proposition that no province or state has any extra-territorial jurisdiction, all legislation being prima facie territorial. The legislative body of any state in enacting legislation makes such legislation binding solely upon those ordinarily resident within the boundaries of such state, and those of other states who bring themselves for the time being within the boundaries of such legislating state. The view of the American law appears to be that set forth in Professor Goodrich's Handbook on the Conflict of Laws, which is as follows : A state may, through its duly authorized Courts, render a Judgment in personam against individuals subject to its jurisdiction . If a Court . renders a, personal judgment against one not subject to its jurisdiction, the judgment is not entitled to recognition in other states. In this country it is invalid where rendered, also, as contrary to due process of law.' The Ontario cases would seem to indicate that the courts here regard Professor Goodrich's view as a correct statement of American law on this point. The law of Ontario, following English precedent, has assumed extra-territorial jurisdiction in certain cases, and in those cases permits the service of a Writ of Summons out of the jurisdiction where the person to be served is a British subject, or if-not, a .notice in lieu of Writ, as only British subjects are amenable to process issued in the name of His Majesty the 'King. The only 1 Page 131, sec. 70. 390 The Canadian Bar Review [No. 5 case of extra-territorial jurisdiction which is applicable to the subject under discussion is the Ontario Rule of Practice 25(g), which permits such extra-territorial service where "the action is founded on a tort committed within Ontario". This is under- standable, because the wrongdoing being committed here, the. lex loci delicti commissi is assumed to give jurisdiction . If the accident happens in a foreign state but action is brought in Ontario against persons residing within Ontario, the question then is what law is applicable and whether action lies at all. Our Courts have recognized and accepted the principles as laid down in England, which principles are set forth in Dicey on The Conflict of Laws,2 namely, that where an act done in a foreign country is a tort it is actionable as such in England if it is both :- 1. Wrongful, i.e., not justifiable according to the law of the foreign country where it was done, and 2. Wrongful, i.e., actionable as a tort according to English law, or, in other words, is an act which if done in England would be a tort. The word `wrongful' bears a somewhat different sense in the two clauses of this Rule. In clause 1 it means an act which is not innocent or excusable, or, in other words, which is either actionable or punish- able according to the law e.g., Italy, where it was done; in clause 2 it means an act which if done in England, would according to the law of England be actionable. The above rules are taken by Dicey from the judgment of Willes J. in the leading case of Phillips v. Eyre.' From the above it will be seen that to decide if an act committed in a foreign country is to be regarded as an actionable tort here, it is necessary to take into consideration both the law of the country where the act is committed (lex loci delicti commissi) and also the law of the country where the action is brought (lex fori) . The rule in the United States would seem to be different, as Goodrich's Handbook, reads as follows:- The general rule is that the law governing the creation and extent of tort liability is that of the place where the tort was committed. In England the doctrine is modified so that there may be recovery in England if the act complained of was not justifiable where done and would have been actionable if committed in England. There is no American authority for the modification .4 See also the following :- while there is some division of opinion, the better view is that questions pertaining to the elements of damages recoverable are matters 2 5th ed., p. 771 . a (1870), L.R. 6 Q.$. 1. 4 Page 188, sec. 92. May 1936] Conflict of Laws in Automobile Negligence Cases 391 of substance and not matters of procedure . In tort, the law of the place of injury determines what items are recoverable, in contract, the law of the place where the contract was to be performed controls 5 The above view is sustained by such cases as Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Browns where the late_ Mr. Justice Holmes states:-- It is established as the law of this Court that when a person recovers in one jurisdiction for a tort committed in another he does so on the ground of an obligation incurred, at the place of the tort that accompanies the person of the Defendant elsewhere and that is not only the ground but the measure of the maximum recovery. See also Loucks v. Standard Oil Co.,' and Commonwealth Fuel Co. v. McNeil," which hold that the generally accepted view in the United States is that if the act is a tort where committed, it may be sued upon in another state having jurisdiction over the defendant, irrespective of whether it was a tort in that state. The American view seems to be more reasonable on the whole than that followed in England and Canada, differing, as it does from the English view which inserts the further proviso that the tort must also be wrongful in the country or state in which the action is brought. Before going further, it might be well to point out, as Westlake does,, that, unless otherwise proved, foreign law is presumed to be the same as English law, excluding those parts of the latter which only exist as special institutions with special machinery, as bankruptcy:-the existence and operation . of such institutions in any foreign country, and in other respects'the difference between foreign and English law must be averred and proved by any party, plaintiff or defendant, who relies on it, and if the proof fails, English law will be applied. Goodrich's Handbook is to the same effect: In the absence of a Statute, courts of one state do not take judicial notice of the law o£ another. If the foreign law is not proved, a presump- tion is frequently made that the foreign law is the same as that of the forumi° The next point is as to what law governs the defences available. Dicey, Conflict of Laws, says:11 Page 179. 1 234 U.S . 542 at p. 547. 7 (1.918), 224 N.Y. 99. 8 103 Conn. 390. 9 WESTLAKE, PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW, 7th ed., p. 423 . 1.° Page 162, sec. 83 . 11 At p. 772. 392 The Canadian Bar Review [No. 5 Any defence to the action which is valid under English law, is, of course available to the Defendant, although such a defence would not be accepted by the law of the country in which the tort took place. Thus in an action for libel the fact that the words complained are true will be a good defence in an action in England, although such a defence might not be sufficient in the country in which the words were spoken . The penalty in the shape of damages will depend on English law as the lex loci fori, but will, of course, be based on the nature of the act done abroad . So also English law would be applied to assess damages for death abroad, though under the foreign law some special rule applied ; con- trast Slater v. Mexican National R. Co. (1904), 194 U.S. 120, where Fuller C.J. dissented, evidently agreeing with English law . On these points compare Goodrich, who states:- No action may be brought for injuries resulting in death of a human being unless an action is given by the law of the state where the injury occurred. The now prevailing view is that a claim for damages for death by a wrongful act may be sued upon wherever the Defendant is subject to suit12 In every case where it is to be decided whether the act is "justifiable" by the law of the foreign state, that law must be proved, and it can only be proved, as we all know, by expert evidence, i.e., evidence given by qualified persons as to the law there applicable. This doctrine has been recognized in our courts many times, but perhaps it is sufficient to refer to a comparatively recent case, Key v.
Recommended publications
  • Ntract Law Eform in Quebec
    Vol . 60 September 1982 Septembre No . 3 NTRACT LAW EFORM IN QUEBEC P.P.C . HAANAPPEL* Montreal I. Introduction . Most of the law of contractual obligations in Quebec is contained in 1982 CanLIIDocs 22 the Civil Code of Lower Canada of 1966. 1 As is the case with the large majority of civil codes in the world, the Civil Code of Quebec was conceived, written and brought into force in a pre-industrialized environment. Its philosophy is one of individualism and economic liberalism . Much has changed in the socio-economic conditions of Quebec since 1866. The state now plays a far more active and im- portant role in socio-economic life than it did in the nineteenth century. More particularly in the field of contracts, the principle of equality of contracting parties or in.other words the principle of equal bargaining power has been severely undermined . Economic distribution chan- nels have become much longer than in 1866, which has had a pro- found influence especially on the contract of sale. Today products are rarely bought directly from their producer, but are purchased through one or more intermediaries so that there will then be no direct con- tractual link between producer (manufacturer) and user (consumer).' Furthermore, the Civil Code of 1866 is much more preoccupied with immoveables (land and buildings) than it .is with moveables (chat- tels) . Twentieth century commercial transactions, however, more often involve moveable than immoveable objects . * P.P.C. Haanappel, of the Faculty of Law, McGill University, Montreal. This article is a modified version of a paper presented by the author to ajoint session of the Commercial and Consumer Law, Contract Law and Comparative Law Sections of the 1981 Conference of the Canadian Association of Law Teachers.
    [Show full text]
  • Practice and Procedure the Applicable Rules Of
    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE THE APPLICABLE RULES OF EVIDENCE IN FEDERAL COURT: A SHORT PRIMER ON A TRICKY QUESTION Whether at trial or during interlocutory proceedings, litigators need to know the applicable rules of evidence, since there are import- ant variations in provincial evidence law. The largest difference, of course, is between the civil law of QueÂbec and laws of the nine common-law provinces. Yet significant differences exist even between the common law provinces themselves. Admissions made during discovery can be contradicted at trial in Ontario, but not in Saskatchewan.1 Spoliation of evidence requires intentional conduct in British Columbia before remedies will be granted, but not in New Brunswick.2 Evidence obtained through an invasion of privacy is inadmissible in Manitoba, while the other provinces have yet to legislate on this issue.3 1. Marchand (Litigation Guardian of) v. Public General Hospital Society of Chatham (2000), 43 C.P.C. (5th) 65, 51 O.R. (3d) 97, 138 O.A.C. 201 (Ont. C.A.) at paras. 72-86, leave to appeal refused [2001] 2 S.C.R. x, 156 O.A.C. 358 (note), 282 N.R. 397 (note) (S.C.C.); Branco v. American Home Assur- ance Co., 2013 SKQB 98, 6 C.C.E.L. (4th) 175, 20 C.C.L.I. (5th) 22 (Sask. Q.B.) at paras. 96-101, additional reasons 2013 SKQB 442, 13 C.C.E.L. (4th) 323, [2014] I.L.R. I-5534, varied on other issues without comment on this point 2015 SKCA 71, 24 C.C.E.L.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Thoughts on Bijuralism in Canada and the World
    Bijuralism in Canada and the world 1 SOME THOUGHTS ON BIJURALISM IN CANADA AND THE WORLD By Marie-Claude Gervais, By Marie-France Séguin, Legal Counsel, Office of La Francophonie, Special Counsel—Civil Law, Civil Law and Corporate, Management Sector, Civil Law and Corporate Management Sector, Department of Justice Canada Office of the Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Justice Canada General Introduction A society produces various types of discourse and translates them into reality. In this way, it learns to know itself and to evolve. It finds words, signs and symbols for those realities. Law plays a role in this process, and that role is defined by its relationship to methods of reasoning and regulation and through its identification with values that ensure its coherence. Juridical cognition that is manifested through diverse methods of legislation is of course a matter of interest to more than one discipline. And an understanding of more than one legal system in a single community raises even greater challenges to the extent that the coexisting systems have their own identity. However, the linear view one might be tempted to take of the manner in which legal traditions have developed may be convenient in this context, but incorrect. There has been too great a confluence of ideas shaping the history of these traditions for anyone to disregard their similarities and mutual ties. This will be of much greater interest to sociologists and legal historians. We are neither. We are not interested in legal agents or socio-legal representations, but in the meaningful relationships between the various types of legal discourse, that is to say, between legal traditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearsay Rule in Quebec Law of Evidence in Civil Matters
    The Hearsay Rule in Quebec Law of Evidence in Civil Matters Hon. G. R. W. Owen * The Hearsay Rule is stated in Phipson, Law of Evidence,' to be Oral or written statements made by persons not called as witnesses are not receivable to prove the TRUTH of the facts stated except... A comparatively recent judgment 2 has raised the question as to whether the rule of evidence excluding hearsay should be applied in civil matters in the Province of Quebec. In Marchand v. Begnoche an action in damages was taken by the widow of the victim of an automobile accident against the heirs of the owner of the automobile in which the plaintiff's husband and the defendants' "auteur" were the only occupants. The owner of the automobile died immediately at the scene of the accident. The plain- tiff's husband lived for two or three days after the accident. There was no other witness of the accident. The widow alleged that the owner of the automobile was driving at the time of the accident. During the "enquite" the widow's attorney attempted to question a doctor with respect to statements, concerning the circumstances of the accident, made to the doctor by the plaintiff's husband at the hospital, shortly after the accident and shortly before his death. The plaintiff's lawyer particularly wished to make proof of state- ments by the deceased as to who was driving the automobile. The defendants' attorney vigorously opposed this evidence on the ground that it was hearsay. The doctor would be testifying as to statements which he heard the deceased make, while the deceased was not under oath and was not subject to cross-examination, with the object of proving the truth of such statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Legal Research and Writing Guide (
    CANADIAN LEGAL RESEARCH I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 III. TREATISES ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 A. Federal ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 B. Federal and Provincial .............................................................................................................................................. 4 C. Provincial .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 D. Subject Law Reporters .............................................................................................................................................. 5 VI. STATUTES ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 A. Federal ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 B. Provincial .................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Les Obligations
    GUIDE TO THE USE OF THE DICTIONARY In anticipation of the eventual publication of a comprehensive edition of the Private Law Dictionary and Bilingual Lexicons, the Quebec Research Centre of Private and Comparative Law has prepared the Private Law Dictionary of Obligations and Bilingual Lexicons which presents the fundamental private law terminology of Quebec’s law of Obligations. The work takes into account the changes introduced by the Civil Code of Québec (S.Q. 1991, c. 64) and by other changes to the law that have occurred since the second edition of the Private Law Dictionary (1991), including those pertaining to federal legislation. An effort has been made to situate the law in view of the relationship between the Civil Code of Québec and the Civil Code of Lower Canada, as that relationship reflects both the continuity and renewal of the general law of Obligations. The Private Law Dictionary of Obligations and Bilingual Lexicons is divided into two parts. The first part, the Dictionary proper, contains more than 2,400 terms and expressions taken from the vocabulary used in the legislative sources of the law of Obligations (codes, statutes and regulations), in doctrinal writings of legal scholars, in judgments of the courts and, to a certain extent, in the language used in dealings between individuals (e.g. contracts, wills) and ordinary usage. An English-French lexicon has been appended to the articles of the Dictionary at the end of each given entry. The second part consists of the French-English lexicon which, with the lexicon integrated in each entry, forms the other half of the Bilingual Lexicons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution of Canada and the Conflict of Laws
    Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Osgoode Digital Commons PhD Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2001 The onsC titution of Canada and the Conflict of Laws Janet Walker Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/phd Part of the Conflict of Laws Commons, and the Jurisdiction Commons Recommended Citation Walker, Janet, "The onC stitution of Canada and the Conflict of Laws" (2001). PhD Dissertations. 18. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/phd/18 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in PhD Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Osgoode Digital Commons. THE CONSTITUTION OF CANADA AND THE CONFLICT OF LAWS Janet Walker A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Worcester College Trinity Term 2001 The Constitution of Canada and the Conflict of Laws Janet Walker, Worcester College Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, Trinity Term 2001 This thesis explains the constitutional foundations for the conflict of laws in Canada. It locates these constitutional foundations in the text of key constitutional documents and in the history and the traditions of the courts in Canada. It compares the features of the Canadian Constitution that provide the foundation for the conflict of laws with comparable features in the constitutions of other federal and regional systems, particularly of the Constitutions of the United States and of Australia. This comparison highlights the distinctive Canadian approach to judicial authority-one that is the product of an asymmetrical system of government in which the source of political authority is the Constitution Act and in which the source of judicial authority is the continuing local tradition of private law adjudication.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Liability in a Mixed Jurisdiction: Quebec and the Network of Ratio Communis
    THE TULANE EUROPEAN AND CIVIL LAW FORUM VOLUME 28 2013 Civil Liability in a Mixed Jurisdiction: Quebec and the Network of Ratio Communis Ádám Fuglinszky* I. RATIO COMMUNIS, COMPARATIVE LAW AND MIXED LEGAL SYSTEMS ............................................................................................... 2 A. Comparative Law and the ‘Better Law’ ............................... 2 B. Mixed Legal Systems and the ‘Better Law’, Identifying Rationes Communes .......................................... 4 C. Impediments to the Research: Historical (Distorting) and Coincidental Factors ................................ 10 D. Structure of the Research—Five Groups ............................ 12 II. INFLUENCE TOWARDS RATIO COMMUNIS ......................................... 13 A. Common Law Impacts on Quebec Law ............................. 13 1. Liability ............................................................................. 13 a. Defamation ............................................................... 13 b. The Liability of Managing Directors and Officers ..................................................................... 15 c. Culpability and Fault ................................................ 17 2. Damages as the Legal Consequence of Liability ............ 19 a. Non-Pecuniary Damages ......................................... 19 b. Punitive Damages .................................................... 23 3. Quebec Law Impacts on Common Law .......................... 27 a. Misfeasance in Public Office, Roncarelli and Its Impacts................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Canada's Legal Traditions
    Journal of Civil Law Studies Volume 11 Number 1 Article 3 11-29-2018 Canada’s Legal Traditions: Sources of Unification, Diversification, or Inspiration? Rosalie Jukier Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls Part of the Civil Law Commons Repository Citation Rosalie Jukier, Canada’s Legal Traditions: Sources of Unification, Diversification, or Inspiration?, 11 J. Civ. L. Stud. (2018) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol11/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Law Studies by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CANADA’S LEGAL TRADITIONS: SOURCES OF UNIFICATION, DIVERSIFICATION, OR INSPIRATION? Rosalie Jukier∗ I. Introduction ............................................................................... 76 II. Quebec and the Canadian Legal Landscape ............................. 78 III. The Unification Model ............................................................ 80 IV. The Diversification Model ...................................................... 84 V. The Contemporary Position ..................................................... 87 VI. The Inspiration Model ............................................................ 94 A. The Use of “Caution” in Cross-Fertilization ....................... 96 B. Divergence Where Appropriate ........................................... 98
    [Show full text]
  • Seizln in the Quebec Law of Successions
    SEIZLN IN THE QUEBEC LAW OF SUCCESSIONS Jerome C. Smyth* "Le mort saisit le vif, son hoir plus proche et habile i lui succ~der", stated article 318 of the Coutume de Paris. This maxim forms the basis of article 607 of the Quebec Civil Code, which reads: "The lawful heirs, when they inherit, are seized by law alone of the property, rights and actions of the deceased, subject to the obligations of dis- charging all the liabilities of the succession; but the Crown requires to be judicially put in possession in the manner set forth in the Code of Civil Procedure." Seizin has received many definitions during the past. Simmonet calls it: ".... une fiction de la loi qui suppose que le de cujus, i l'article de la mort, a remis i son successible, la masse h6rditaire. La saisine, dans son accepta- tion le plus gnfiral, est le charactfre l6gal sous lequel se manifeste -la pos- session."1 Mignault defines it as: l'anticipation 16gale de la possession et des avantages qui en rfsul- tent."2 And Beaudant expresses it in this manner: "La saisine hir~ditaire, c'est la transmission l'hritier, par le fait de l'ouverture de la succession, de la possession des droits et biens qui appartenaient au dffunt.' '3 For present purposes, let us call seizin a legal fiction, by virtue of which the successor is deemed, from the moment of the deceased's death, to be in pos- session of the property and rights of the succession without the necessity of material apprehension or judicial proceeding.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments to the Law Applicable to Water in Québec ∗
    RECENT DEVELOPMENTS TO THE LAW APPLICABLE TO WATER IN QUÉBEC ∗ Madeleine Cantin Cumyn † INTRODUCTION Despite Canada’s apparent abundance of fresh water, much of it is situated in the Arctic and flows north—away from the population that is mostly established on a narrow strip of land along the border with the United States. In southern Québec, there is serious concern about the St. Lawrence River, which supplies half of its inhabitants with fresh water. Elsewhere, some localities face pollution or overuse of the groundwater reserves on which they depend. Against this backdrop, fresh water has been the object of much recent legislative attention. Having set up a commission of inquiry on the management of water in 1999, which delivered a monumental report in 2000, 1 the Québec Government is under pressure to act on its recommendations. Within the structure of the Québec legal system, water can be viewed as a part of both private and public law, if that classical distinction is considered relevant. The Civil Code of Québec (C.C.Q.) has a number of articles on water which we will consider first as they provide the foundation on which other legislation on water is, in principle, elaborated.2 ∗ Editor’s Note: Citations herein generally conform to THE BLUEBOOK : A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION (Columbia Law Review Ass’n et al. eds., 18th ed. 2005). In order to make the citations more useful for Canadian practitioners, abbreviations and certain other conventions have been adopted from the CANADIAN GUIDE TO UNIFORM LEGAL CITATION [Manuel Canadien de la Référence Juridique] (McGill Law Journal eds., 4th ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Costs and Fees in Common Law Canada and Quebec
    COSTS AND FEES IN COMMON LAW CANADA AND QUEBEC H. Patrick Glenn Peter M. Laing Professor of Law Faculty of Law & Institute of Comparative Law McGill University Civil procedure in Canada, including the law of costs and fees, is largely provincial in origin and therefore varies from province to province. The provincial civil procedure (in the form of Rules of Civil Procedure (RCP) in the common law provinces and a Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) in Quebec) applies in the provincial and superior courts of each province. There is a Federal Court, with Federal Rules of Procedure, but neither the Federal Court nor the Federal Rules enjoy the level of prominence enjoyed by the U.S. Federal Courts and the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The law relating to costs and fees varies from province to province but there are considerable similarities amongst the common law provinces. The law of Quebec shares some basic rules with the other provinces but Quebec law is the most distinctive of the Canadian provinces. I. The Basic Rules: Who Pays? 1. All Canadian jurisdictions follow the ‘world rule’ that costs in principle are ‘in the cause’. The loser pays, subject to the discretion of the court.1 This extends to both attorney fees and court costs, though they are separately determined. Court costs are recoverable as ‘disbursements’ made in the course of litigation by the successful party or his or her counsel. Attorney fees are recoverable as such, though the amount of recovery varies greatly between Quebec and the common law provinces.
    [Show full text]