Where an employer breaches its duty of care by failing to provide specific instructions for a work procedure, causation will not be established if the instruction contended for would not have corrected the plaintiff's erroneous factual assessment that led to the injury. An instruction specifying a size threshold for tipping does not assist where the plaintiff's error was in assessing the size of the load, not in knowing the correct procedure. The dissent highlights an alternative analysis: if the appropriate instruction would have required an assessment at the tipping site that the plaintiff did not perform, causation may be established on the basis that the plaintiff would have complied with the instruction and the assessment would have revealed the true state of affairs.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.