B.C. Court Finds No Liability For Company Hired To Clear Municipal Sidewalks

• Published date: 23 August 2022
• Subject Matter: Corporate/Commercial Law, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Corporate and Company Law, Contracts and Commercial Law, Trials & Appeals & Compensation, Professional Negligence
• Law Firm: CLC (Canadian Litigation Counsel)
• Author: Mr Duncan Taylor (Brownlee LLP)

A recent decision by the Supreme Court of British Columbia has found that a pedestrian who slips and falls on a municipal sidewalk cannot sue a contractor retained by a property owner to clear the sidewalk of ice and snow. While most municipalities in Canada have bylaws requiring property owners to remove snow from adjacent municipal sidewalks, courts in both Alberta (in Koch v. Slave Lake Jewellers Ltd., 2001 ABQB 445 and Kluane v. Chasse, 2001 ABQB 244) and British Columbia (in Der v. Zhao, 2021 BCCA 82) have ruled that for both commercial and residential property owners, municipal bylaws do not translate in to a duty of care at common law or under the relevant Occupiers' Liability legislation. However, the above decisions were silent on whether a Plaintiff could claim under the tort of negligence against a snow removal company retained by an occupier to clear an adjacent municipal sidewalk. In the recent decision of Pavlovic v The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 2211, 2022 BCSC 1368, the British Columbia Supreme Court confirmed that no such duty exists.

In Pavlovic, the Plaintiff fell on December 20, 2016 and fractured her wrist while walking on a sidewalk adjacent to The MacGregor condominium complex in Vancouver. Initially, the Plaintiff filed a claim under both negligence and the British Columbia Occupiers Liability Actagainst the owners of The MacGregor, the property management company hired by them, the City of Vancouver, and Just George Cleaning and Maintenance Inc., the company retained by the property manager and the owners of The MacGregor to conduct maintenance duties (including snow removal) in and around the premises.

Eventually, the Plaintiff dropped all claims against the property owners, the City, and the management company, as well as her claim under the Occupiers Liability Actagainst Just George Cleaning, leaving only her claim in negligence against that contractor. A summary trial on liability was held to determine whether or not the contractor owed the Plaintiff a duty of care. The Plaintiff argued that previous case law in British Columbia and Alberta confirmed the existence of such a duty, while the contractor argued that it was too far removed from the Plaintiff, and that if the property owners did not owe the Plaintiff a duty of care, the Defendant did not either.

In support of her argument that a common law duty of care existed, the Plaintiff cited the case of Reichert v Home Depot Canada Inc., 2017 ABQB 184. In that decision, Master...