Tort
Duty of Care: Anns/Cooper Framework
Foreseeability, proximity, residual policy.
Cooper v Hobart (2001) sets the modern Canadian framework for novel duties of care. Stage 1 asks whether harm was reasonably foreseeable and whether the parties were in a relationship of sufficient proximity. Stage 2 asks whether residual policy concerns negate the prima facie duty.
Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth (2007) applies the framework to recognise the tort of negligent investigation. Childs v Desormeaux (2006) refuses to extend social-host liability. Mustapha v Culligan (2008) clarifies the foreseeability threshold for psychiatric injury.
Key principles
- Stage 1 foreseeability + proximityIncluding expectations, representations, reliance, statutory framework.
- Stage 2 residual policyIndeterminate liability; conflict with statutory duty.
- Ordinary fortitudeThreshold question for psychiatric injury foreseeability.
Cases (4)
Cooper v Hobart
landmark[2001] 3 SCR 537
Supreme Court of Canada· 2001· Tort
Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board
landmark[2007] 3 SCR 129
Supreme Court of Canada· 2007· Tort
Childs v Desormeaux
landmark[2006] 1 SCR 643
Supreme Court of Canada· 2006· Tort
Mustapha v Culligan of Canada Ltd
landmark[2008] 2 SCR 114
Supreme Court of Canada· 2008· Tort