the proper order has been made in the circumstances. We express no opinion as to the sufficiency of the certificates
Re under which the appellant was originally committed to the Ontario Hospital at Brockville, but deem it proper to Kerwin J. point out that it might be difficult successfully to contend that a certificate did " show clearly " that due inquiry was made into all the necessary facts relating to the case of the patient, if a medical practitioner signing a certificate considered that the patient had delusions without any investigation on the doctor's part as to whether they were in fact delusions.
The appeal should be dismissed without costs.
Solicitors for the appellant: Berger & Greenberg.
Solicitor for the respondents: C. P. Hope.
MEDERIC
LANDREVILLE
AND
* May26, ARTHUR GARDNER
(DEFEND- APPELLANTS;
27, 28. AN TS) ...........................
J
AND
ELMYES BROWN
(PLAINTIFF) ........
RESPONDENT.
ON APPEAL FROM THE APPEAL ONTARIO
Negligence-Motor vehicles-Plaintiff struck by motor car-Action for damages-Directions to jury-Jury's findings-Question as to negligence of plaintiff-Onus of proof on defendants as to negligence- Form of question to jury-Amount of damages awarded-New trial.
The action was for damages for injury to plaintiff caused by his being struck by a motor car while he was making a purchase at a bakery sleigh on a business street in the city of Ottawa. The jury, to the question: "Have the defendants satisfied you that the damages sustained by the plaintiff were not caused or contributed to by the negligence of [the driver of the car]?" answered "No"; and to the question: "Was the plaintiff guilty of any negligence which caused or contributed to the accident?" answered "No"; and assessed plaintiff's damages at $25,000, for which amount judgment was given. An appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario was dismissed, and defendants appealed to this Court.
This Court ordered a new trial.
*PRESENT:-Duff
CJ. and Rinfret, Crocket, Davis, Hudson and
Taschereau JJ.
S.C.R.]