We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Drowning is one of the leading causes of injury and death to
Canadian children. An estimated 54 children, age 14 and under,
drown each year in Canada. Another 140 are hospitalized for near
drowning, many suffering from brain injuries. Swimming pools are
the site of nearly half of all of these drowning and near drowning
incidents.
Safer fencing would protect more children from pool injuries.
Key features include:
Four-sided fencing that completely encloses the swimming pool
area to block access from the house;
Minimum height of 1.2 meters, (4 feet) to prevent children from
climbing the fence;
Legislation that covers all pools with a depth of over 0.6
meters (2 feet);
A self-closing and self-latching gate to the pool area;
and
Fences that inhibit climbing.
Pool tragedies can result in criminal charges or civil lawsuits.
The owner in charge of the pool may be sued for any deaths or
injuries that result from drowning or near drowning accidents. The
owner must have taken the reasonable steps to ensure his or her
pool is safe. The owners of public pools have additional
responsibilities including lifeguards and proper signage.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Amato v. Welsh, 2013 ONCA 258 marks an interesting development in the law – it suggests the previously inviolable doctrine of absolute privilege which protects lawyers from suit may admit an exception.
As the current trend to self-representation increases, regardless the reason, one must ask if the tradition of lawyers appearing before Courts, above the Ontario Court of Justice, ought to continue the traditional legal wearing of robes.
The Supreme Court of Canada has recently considered when a civil court should bar claims on the basis that the issues in dispute were finally disposed of in a prior administrative proceeding.
A discussion on a recent case where the Supreme Court of Canada granted a leave application in the following case of interest to Canadian businesses and professions.
Many Canadian limitations statutes explicitly state that "no limitation period" is applicable to a proceeding in which the relief sought is a declaratory judgment.
