Question

Mrs. Kauffman was riding up the escalator owned by the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). The escalator was equipped with a metal-clad handrail instead of the rubber type, which presumably would have been less slippery. Three young men, riding the same escalator just above Kauffman, began pushing each other around. They ultimately fell on Kauffman, knocking her over and severely injuring her. Kauffman sued the TTC for damages, claiming that it had been negligent in installing an untested handrail made of metal which offered less support and that is why she fell. Apply the principles of tort law to this situation. Suggest a result.

Answer 1

In the given case, Kauffman will not succeed in her case against TTC for damages. Irrespective of the type of material used in handrail, the incident would have occurred, because the reason for her fall was the weight of the three men (who fell on her) and not the railing. Here, the cause of the accident was not the handrail, but the negligent act of the men riding the escalator with Kauffman. Had, they not pushed each other on the escalator, they wouldn't have fallen on Kauffman (which ultimately resulted in her fall). Also, the TTC had no responsibility to supervise and monitor the use of the escalator (as to by whom and how it is/was used). Further, while the TTC should have ensured that the handrail was properly installed, it was in no way responsible for providing insurance to the users of the escalator. Therefore, the TTC cannot be held for a wrongful act or omission which forms the basis for granting damages under the tort law.