Ontario Court finds duty of care in underage house party case

In a recent ruling following a jury trial, Justice G. Gow held in the matter of Foulidis v. Schummer et al. that underage organizers of a party owed a duty of care to those in attendance.

The claim stems from an incident in which the plaintiff’s foot was run over by a motor vehicle as he and the driver left a party involving underage drinking. The organizers of the party, “AS” and “SN” (collectively the “Hosts”) organized the party in secret from their parents to celebrate AS’s 16th birthday. AS’s older sister, NS, was also named as a defendant, as she purchased some alcohol for AS and her friends. 

Notably, the Hosts did not supply alcohol to their guests; however, they permitted the party to grow to approximately 100 attendees. Based on the facts, Justice Gow held that it was foreseeable to the Hosts that attendees would bring and share alcohol among themselves, most being under legal drinking age. The plaintiff attended the party with a group of friends where he consumed alcohol which he did not bring. 

The party was broken up near 11:00 p.m. after the Hosts advised guests that the police had been called. As guests were leaving, the plaintiff was involved in an incident with a vehicle which was leaving the party, where he attempted to hold onto the outside of the vehicle, fell, and suffered a serious crush injury to his foot and ankle. 

The defendant driver argued that the Hosts and NS owed the plaintiff a duty of care. 

Foreseeability and duty of care

Justice Gow referred to the decision of Childs v. Desormeaux, 2006 SCC18, where the Supreme Court held that hosting a party where alcohol is served, without more, does not ordinarily create a duty to members of the public harmed by a guest’s conduct. Justice Dow also referred to Williams v. Richard, where the Court of Appeal described social host cases as existing on a spectrum of where a duty of care may be imposed on a social host. 

Justice Gow held that there was sufficient evidence to find that the Hosts owed the plaintiff a duty of care. Justice Gow found that the Hosts were negligent in facilitating the illegal consumption of alcohol by minors by hosting a gathering of minors, where it was understood that alcohol would be brought, consumed, and shared, and done so deliberately without parental knowledge or approval.

Accordingly, Justice Gow held that the risk of bodily injury to an attendee was sufficiently foreseeable and that a duty of care existed. 

Justice Gow dismissed the claim against NS, as the harm was not reasonably foreseeable to NS. Justice Gow found that NS was not an organizer of the party and was not aware that the Hosts were hosting a party when she purchased the alcohol. 

Implications for social hosts and insurers

Justice Gow’s decision creates risk on social hosts and their insurers that a duty of care may be found against a host, even where no alcohol was provided to guests. Based on the analysis of Justice Gow, if a claimant is able to show that the hosts were negligent in some manner in hosting the party, they may be found to have owed the claimant a duty of care. 

Justice Gow’s holding that SN did not owe the claimant a duty of care, despite supplying the underage Hosts with alcohol, was a reaffirmation that there must still be foreseeability when assigning a duty of care and will likely be helpful for the defence of future social host actions. 

Should you require additional information or wish to receive a copy of this decision, please contact Alex Morrison.

LEGAL NOTICE: This publication is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute, and shall not be construed as, the rendering of legal advice or professional services of any kind, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship between Clyde & Co Canada and the recipient. The information contained in this publication may not reflect the most current legal developments and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct, or up to date. Furthermore, nothing herein constitutes the endorsement of any particular case, principle, or proposition. You should not act on any information found here without first consulting a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction who can evaluate your specific circumstances. Clyde & Co Canada expressly disclaims all liability for actions taken or not taken based on the content of this document.