In the 2025 decision of Sprowl v. First Capital, the plaintiff, Rose Marie Sprowl, slipped and fell in a parking on January 12, 2020. On that date she was almost 81 years of age. Ms. Sprowl says that she slipped on a patch of ice and suffered damages.
Both the snow removal contractor and owner were found liable.
The snow removal contractor admitted to monitoring the weather conditions, but stated that he did visual inspections and did not actually get out of his vehicle to determine if there were icy patches, especially between parked vehicles
The owner was found liable because although the owner hired a reputable maintenance company, pursuant to Section 6(1) of the Occupiers' Liability Act which provides that an occupier will not be liable for a contractor's negligence if (a) it acted reasonably in entrusting the work to the contractor; and (b) it took reasonable steps to ensure that work had been properly done, the Court found that the owner failed to properly inspect the work carried out.
Even though the evidence showed that the Plaintiff crossed the parking lot to run errands without issue, and despite the expectation of encountering snow and ice in Canadian parking lots during winter, liability was placed solely on the owner and snow removal contractor.
Thoughts and key takeaways:
- This decision will likely be appealed as it sets a very high threshold
- Winter contractors should be advised that visual inspections will not be found sufficient
- Owners need to conduct inspections to ensure work by subcontractors is being carried out and not just rely on contracts.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
