Top court hears whether hosts are responsible for drunken guests
Should hosts of house parties be responsible for their guests' actions? Canada's highest court pondered that question Wednesday, in a case that could affect anyone who hosts a party â and perhaps anyone who owns a house.
The Supreme Court of Canada was hearing the case of Zoe Childs, who was in a car accident in Ottawa in 1999 that killed her boyfriend and left her a paraplegic at age 18.
The driver of the other car â an alcoholic with previous drunk-driving convictions â had just left a New Year's Eve house party and had more than twice the legal limit of alcohol in his system.
Desmond Desormeaux was jailed in 2000 for 10 years, in what was thought to be the country's longest sentence for impaired driving causing death.
Childs baffled by hosts who deny responsibility
Childs filed a civil suit against the hosts of the party attended by Desormeaux, trying to establish they were responsible for his actions.
Seven years after the accident that left her in a wheelchair, Childs said she still cannot fathom how the host of a party could feel no sense of responsibility for a guest who drinks and drives.
"I just don't understand how people can't have a moral issue about it. I don't understand how people can honestly sit and say, 'I have no responsibility.'"
An Ontario Superior Court judge dismissed Child's initial case.
- FROM AUG. 30, 2002: Judge dismisses lawsuit against party hosts
Then the Ontario Court of Appeal concluded hosts could be liable for the actions of guests, but they were not liable in the particular circumstances of Desormeaux's case.
- FROM MAY 19, 2004: Party hosts could be liable: Ontario court
Childs appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, asking it to decide whether the hosts of the party that night bore partial responsibility for the crash that followed.
Childs' lawyer argues that crash was predictable
The arguments on Wednesday focused around the issue of the "foreseeability of harm," that is, whether the hosts should have seen the accident coming.
"They did absolutely nothing to protect this young lady from a chronic alcoholic, three times convicted with point-two-four in his blood," said Childs' lawyer, Barry Laushway.
"Whatever the test is, we say it has to be more than what these people did â which is absolutely nothing."
Proponents of tougher drunk-driving laws, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, have said private party hosts should meet the same standards that apply to bars, which are responsible for drinkers.
Hosts not responsible for counting drinks, their lawyer counters
Eric Williams, the lawyer for the hosts, argued in court that his clients had not served Desormeaux the alcohol and could not have known how much he had consumed or exactly how drunk he was when he drove off.
Williams also argued that a finding of social host liability in the case could unfairly burden any Canadian who has friends over to share a drink.
"That's the risk. The risk is unlimited liability."
Lawyers for the Insurance Board of Canada made similar arguments in court, predicting a spike in both lawsuits and insurance premiums if the Supreme Court rules in Childs' favour.
Some legal experts have also said they weren't convinced that holding hosts accountable would in any way reduce incidents of drunk driving.
The Supreme Court's decision was expected to take several months.