CORPORATION MUNICIPALE. —RESPONSABILITE
Cour SUPÉRIEURE, MONTRÉAL, 17 mai 1872.
Présent : MACKAY, J.
GUIMOND vs CORPORATION DE MONTRÉAL, Jugé: Qu’une personne qui, par curiosité, assiste à un incendie, et qui y reçoit une blessure grave, par un cheval que les pompiers ont laissé sans gardien, a une action en dommages contre la corporation à
qui ce cheval appartient.
FER CURIAM : Plaintiff was a blacksmith, and sued for damages, for injuries sustained by him on the 24th october
FORTE ne
fi (4 if [74
189, when he was knocked down by à horse attached to a ladder cart of the corporation, and his arm was broken. During five months he was disabled, and was under medical attendance for four. He now brought an action, and alleged that the horse ran away from being left without à guardian, and taking fright at the fire which was going on at the Unitarian Church. Plaintiff was standing a little off the pavement, in consequence of the large crowd present. He claimed
in all $2,000, including 200 loss of usual earnings, $100 for
medical attendance, and the balance for permanent injuries and sufferings. There was a plea that the accident was attributable only to plaintiff's curiosity in going to the fire: that he had no reason to be there : that, with ordinary prudence, he would not have suffered. The evidence showed that there was an alarm at the time: that the walls of the church were about to fall. Plaintiff had previously been helping the hosemen to put out the fire, and was standing a little off the pavement, when he was knocked down by the horse and had his arm broken. The horse and cart had been left upon the street without guardian. It was proved that plaintiff was, at the time, earning $8 a week. He claimed to have been permanently injured. The doctor swore that he was more exposed to illness now than formerly. Witnesses differed as to the amount of the damages. One swore that $2,000 would be little enough. On the other hand it was proved, by the corporation, that plaintiff was now curced, and was earning #9 a week, one dollar more than he did before the accident. As to the non-liability of the ceorporation, the Court could not admit that at all. Even, as the counsel for the corporation would have had à good claim, had he been standing there and injured in the same way, so had this man. As long as there was no law forbidding persons to go to tires, the court must recognize their right to be present, even às curious spectators. This case might be regarded in the same light as one between private individuals. The corporation must be condenned here as in any case where it does damage, as, for instance, by flooding cellars, etc. Plaintiff had à perf'ect right of action, and his claim must be maintained to the extent of 360 for loss of time, medical attendance, ete. (4 R. L., 285).
a l'in int du
dé mil le | dre dét l'a tan sal mit san deu de
sun don par un.
Le
ached to a 8 broken.
r medical nd alleged guardian, t the Unithe pave- Te claimed s, $100 for it injuries ident was o the fire :
inary pruce showed alls of the usly been tanding à wn by the t had been oved that claimed to re that he Witnesses wore that and it was cured, and did before ration, the ounsel for d he been
this man.
oo to tires, at, even as à the same orporation s damage, had à perned to the etc. (HR.
