Waivers of Liability Enforced in Schnarr v Blue Mountain Resorts Ltd.

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.MCivil Litigation, Contract Disputes, Negligence0 Comments

What happens when statutes collide?

In Schnarr v Blue Mountain Resorts Limited, the Ontario Court of Appeal was recently asked to bar a negligence suit by enforcing waivers of liability signed by skiers visiting a ski resort.

The issues in the case clustered around the dual application of both the Occupiers’ Liability Act (“OLA“) and the Consumer Protection Act (“CPA“) to agreements between skiers and ski resorts.

As an occupier of premises, ski resorts are subject to the OLA.  To encourage landowners to make their property available for recreational activities, the OLA allows for landowners to limit their liability through waivers of liability.  However, as a consumer agreement, these ski resort contracts are also governed by the CPA.  The CPA requires services supplied under a consumer agreement to be of a reasonably acceptable quality and deems waivers purporting to limit resultant liability to be void.

The concurrent governance of the OLA and the CPA thrust two issues before the Court of Appeal: (1) whether the two provisions could be interpreted to find a state of harmony; and (2) if not, what effect should be ascribed to each provision?

The Court of Appeal answered the first question by finding a conflict between the two provisions.  It rejected the argument – accepted by the trial judge – that harmony could be established by limiting the application of each provision to a specific cause-of-action.  The trial judge had held that the OLA provision allows waivers to limit liability in tort, while the CPA provision voids waivers attempting to limit liability under contract.

The Court of Appeal denied this attempt at harmony by noting that each statute deals with a duty of care, not a particular cause-of-action.  The provisions of each statute therefore extend across the same range of liability, encompassing both tort and contract.  The OLA allows liability to be waived, while the CPA does not.  Conflict cannot be avoided.

To answer the second question, the Court of Appeal relied upon five principles of statutory interpretation to hold that the OLA provision – enforcing waivers of liability – prevails.

If you require legal advice and representation with respect to a Contract Law matter or commercial dispute, please contact us for an initial consultation.


Brief informational summaries about insurance litigation, commercial litigation and family law litigation matters in the courts of Ontario and Canada are periodically published on our website. Please note that our website content is for informational purposes only, and should not be construed or relied upon to provide legal advice. If you require legal advice, please request an initial consultation with Gilbertson Davis LLP using the Request Consultation Form on this webpage or by contacting our Intake Coordinator on (416) 979-2020, ext. 223 (both subject to the Terms of Use described on our Contact page).

About the Author
Yona Gal, J.D., LL.M

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.M

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *