Conklin v. Smith et al.

That the accident occurred a year before the appellant’s possible entry into Selkirk College.

I find it irrelevant whether it be a year or six years, if there had been reasonable probability that the appellant would have entered Selkirk College. Certainly all of the evidence points to the great improbability of this appellant changing his mind during that year and abandoning a career which so attracted him.

The difficulty of obtaining entry to Selkirk College.

[Page 1117]

The evidence showed that thirty-odd applications were accepted out of 150 to 180, an average of about one in five or a little less. The odds against obtaining successful entry into the University of Washington prosthetics course were much longer but the appellant did succeed in obtaining entry into that college for his prosthetics course.

The appellant’s ability as a pilot had not yet been ascertained.

There was no evidence whatsoever given that would indicate that the appellant was in any way disabled from flying. The respondents had an opportunity to examine or to require medical examinations to demonstrate any physical inability in the appellant such as eyesight colour perception, possibility of air sickness, or the like, and the respondents chose not to do so. In fact, the respondents’ witness, Dr. Paul Rinfret, the Regional Aviation Medical Officer in Vancouver, gave evidence that the medical qualifications necessary for entry into Selkirk College or for a commercial pilot’s licence were very strict but he failed to outline them or in any way indicate how the appellant would not have been successful in passing them.

Employment opportunities with the major airlines had been very limited in recent years and this had a depressing effect on employment in commercial aviation fields.

The Court of Appeal seemed to have assumed that the appellant’s aim was to obtain employment as a pilot with a major airline. Nothing the appellant said or was said on his behalf indicated such was his ambition. On the other hand, he seemed to have been aiming at a commercial pilot’s position in a smaller airline or such other work as is performed by commercial pilots. The appellant gave evidence that he had consulted those who operated such smaller airlines or flying businesses in the area and that although he had not been offered any position, since he was at that time an untrained person simply considering a career, he was told that positions were available. Leonard S. Milne, the officer in charge of flight standards with Altair Aviation, such a smaller flying busi-

[Page 1118] ness, gave evidence for the respondents and in cross-examination agreed that they (Altair Aviation) probably took twenty-five graduates of Selkirk College as instructors. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the conclusion arrived at by the Court of Appeal for British Columbia on this factor was simply not justified upon the evidence.

Selkirk College required applicants to meet certain medical standards and the appellant had not demonstrated his ability to meet those standards.