Controls: show



[log in] or [register] to leave a comment for this document.

Go to: all documents

Options: show


Looking inside:
( display item 10)



[home] [about] [help] [policies] [legal disclaimer]


[profiles] [forum]

Container: Courts

·8· Playground injury claims summary

(Access to Information Request A GEN-2008-00262) Oct.6 2008 11-Oct-2011 [710]

Playground injury claims summary (Access to Information Request A GEN-2008-00262) Oct.6 2008

Commentary - BC - Oct. 24 2008

1. Claiming $1.5 million, against Etobicoke. April 29 1998. A swing broke. A girl fell off, got bruised and got a concussion and “was unconscious for a short period of time.” No settlement.

'''Para 10 of City’s Defence states: “Toronto pleads that park maintenance and staffing is the subject of a policy decision by Toronto and that Coronation Park was maintained in accordance with the policy. T pleads that the park was maintained in accordance with budgetary restraints, the availability of personnel and equipment, all of which met the requisite standard of care”.
{I wonder if this action and # 2 below have been abandoned - what is the time limit for pursuing the action?}'''

2. May 7 1998. Stone House Park. Suing for 1.65 million. Sounds like a swing broke. The statement of claim is illegible. The city “denies that it had a duty to inspect the premises and swings, as alleged, or at all. The City pleads that at all relevant times the premises and swings conformed with all applicable laws, regulation, codes and standards then prevailing.” No Settlement.

3. July 24 2005 a girl hurt her tooth while playing on a spring teeter-totter at Kennedy Margon Park. Her dentist had to make a device to hold the tooth in place and she couldn’t play her favorite sports. She missed school to attend dental appointments and the family was nervous and the tooth still wiggles two years later. Claiming $10,887.93 for pain and suffering and present and future dental work. Not settled, and the City rejects all of it, and wants legal costs.
Small claims court action. Begun in 2007, 2 years after date girl lost her tooth.

4. May 10 2004 man broke his leg when he was checked, also sore all over, also PTSD – suing Toronto Parks and Recreation, the Canlan Ice Sports Corporation and Ice Sports Victoria Arena (formerly New centre Ice Arena) and Toronto Ice Hockey Inc.
No information on the size of claim. No agreement reached.
Plaintiff alleges defendants failed to implement proper ice cleaning, flooding system, competent employees.
{Can we assume that this was discontinued since there is no defence by the City of any of the other defendants?}

5. Dec. 19 1999. Plaintiff sued the Toronto Hockey league, the Board of Ed, the TDSB, the City of Toronto, and 3 refs. A kid hit another kid from behind, “causing him to fall, face first, onto the ice surface. The plaintiff’s helmet was removed from his head and while the plaintiff lay face down…” and then bashed his head into the ice repeatedly plus hitting him all over. The parents said the league was at fault for allowing the other guy to play even though he was known to be violent, and the refs did nothing to stop the attack. It says the plaintiff got a permanent facial deformity. Settlement: $12,000.
Plaintiff claimed $ 1.1 million. Claim paid out in Feb. 2008, 8 years after the incident.

6. Girl claiming $500,000 damages. May 12 2000, she was swinging in park Lawn Park and the swing broke. She fell and broke her leg. Settlement: $9000.
Damages paid in June 2003, 3 years after the incident.

7. June 13 2000, playground near York Mills Arena – 8 year old girl was hanging from rings suspended on a beam and one side of the beam collapsed. She had to have stitches to her face and head. Settlement: July 2003, she was awarded $9,937.50, also the Ministry of Health was awarded $218.78 and the City had to pay $3000 for the girl’s lawyer.

8. Girl at Gord and Irene Risk adventure camp. Suing for $1.125 million. A hockey net fell on her during camp on July 25 2006, and she needs plastic surgery pf her face (broke her nose and lacerated her face). No settlement.

9. August 28 1998, Indian Line Park in Etobicoke. Looks like maybe a young girl was swinging and the swing seat broke, so she fell and injured her (?) spine and got otherwise bruised. Her symptoms are now getting worse. Suing for $825,000. No settlement.

10. Splash water park Toronto zoo, slip and fall Sept.8 2002. Girl fell and cut her chin on a protruding screw on the “seal.” The girl had “extended hospitalization” and has to take medicine for her “accident-related symptomatology.” Settlement: $6500.

11. A woman at Kenneth Parkette on Oct.6 2003 “got on the track ride and grabbed a metal handle attached to the underside of a beam spanning between the two platform towers which supported the slider mechanism. Suddenly without warning the slider mechanism proceeded on the track at high speed and stopped suddenly and without warning, causing the plaintiff to be thrown to the ground.” She broke her tibia and had to get a plate and screws put in. It’s not possible to figure out why the city paid so much, except that the glider mechanism was defective and the loose fill underneath was not topped up (CSA standards were cited) Settlement: $288,634.92 (she asked for $2 million).

12. Aug 6 2006, a girl was on a spring teeter totter at Thomson Park in Scarborough. Her hand was jammed in the springs. She is suing the City and Henderson Equipment for $100,000. She had two broken fingers plus stitches for two other fingers. The City is claiming against Henderson. No settlement.

13. Kitchener Park, August 1 2004. Child was swinging on a baby swing when the top chain came undone and the swing twisted around and the child struck a post. He seems to have broken his leg but he may have had brain damage – very hard to know. No amount mentioned. No settlement.

Key allegations in playground claims:

- failure to keep property clear of faulty equipment
- failure to maintain reasonable inspection system
- failure to keep equipment in proper state of repair
- failure to warn of dangers
- failure to hire competent employees
- failure to adequately supervise maintenance employees