COUR SUPRtME DU CANADA
APPELLANT; *Mar. 12
May 22
AND
THE
SHAWINIGAN
WATER
&
POWER COMPANY (Defendant)
RESPONDENT. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, APPEAL SIDE, PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
Negligence-High voltage transmission line-Erection of television antenna on roof of house by 16 year old boy-Contact of antenna with wire-Power company not liable-Civil Code, art. 1053.
The plaintiff, a 16 year old boy, was seriously injured when the television antenna he was trying to install on the roof of his father's house came in contact with a high voltage transmission wire belonging to the defendant company. The antenna was some 7 feet high and over feet wide. The wire was some feet away from the part of the roof where the plaintiff was situated when the accident occurred. The installation of that power line had been authorized by the Provincial Electricity Board and, as prescribed by the Board, complied with the National Electrical Safety Code of the U.S. The evidence showed that the clearance required, under the regulations of Hydro-Quebec, between a building and that kind of line was greater than that required by the said Code. The trial judge apportioned the liability at 75 per cent against the defendant company and 25 per cent against the plaintiff. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the action. The plaintiff appealed to this Court.
Held: The appeal should be dismissed.
Per Fauteux, Martland, Judson and Ritchie JJ.: The defendant company should not be considered to have been in breach of the duty to maintain a reasonable clearance between its line and the house merely because another electrical transmission company adopted a different standard. Assuming, however, that the Hydro-Quebec standards ought to apply, the defendant was not required reasonably to anticipate injury to a person located more than feet from its line. In the circumstance of this case, it was not an undue proximity of the defendant's line to the house which was the effective cause of the accident.
Per Pigeon J.: The trial judge did not err in holding that the plaintiff had been at fault. The latter's imprudence was unquestionable. On the other hand, the defendant company could not be considered to have committed a fault merely because it did not follow the standards established by Hydro-Quebec. The evidence does not disclose that these standards were generally considered as the only ones acceptable. Faute-Fil ilectrique a haute tension-Installation par un gargon de 16 ans d'une antenne de tilivision sur le toit d'une maison-Contact de l'antenne avec le fil-Absence de responsabilit de la compagnie d'glectricit-Code civil, art. 1058.
Fauteux, Martland, Judson, Ritchie and Pigeon JJ. R.C.S.