Party hosts not responsible for drunk drivers: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously on Friday that hosts cannot be held legally liable for letting their guests drive home drunk.

• SUPREME COURT OF CANADA DECISION: Childs v. Desormeaux

The ruling involves the case of Zoe Childs, who was left paralyzed on Jan 1, 1999, when Desmond Desormeaux slammed his car into the one she was riding in. Her boyfriend, Derek Dupre, was killed in the collision in Ottawa.

Desormeaux was a self-confessed alcoholic with two previous impaired-driving convictions. When he was tested three hours after the accident, he had more than twice the legal limit of alcohol in his system.

He was jailed in 2000 for 10 years in what was thought to be the country's longest sentence for impaired driving causing death.

After the criminal case was completed, Childs filed a $6-million civil suit seeking damages against Desormeaux as well as Dwight Courrier and Julie Zimmerman, the hosts of the New Year's party.

• FROM JAN. 18, 2006: Top court hears whether hosts are responsible for drunken guests

The high court upheld two lower court rulings that had also rejected the liability claim.

Not required to monitor guests

"I conclude that as a general rule, a social host does not owe a duty of care to a person injured by a guest who has consumed alcohol," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in Friday's ruling.

The court also said that when it comes to monitoring a person's drinking, hosts of home parties are not bound by the same rules as commercial establishments, such as bars and restaurants.

"While, in the commercial context, it is reasonable to expect that the provider will act to protect the public interest, the same cannot be said of the social host," the decision stated.

It went on to note that a social host "neither undertakes nor is expected to monitor the conduct of guests on behalf of the public."

Barry Laushway, Childs's lawyer, told CBC News his client is proud of her efforts but "she is disappointed that the Supreme Court did not see fit to agree with her."

He noted that, whatever the ruling, the accident's impact on his client remains profound. Childs was 18 when it happened and "she's in a wheelchair for the rest of her life."

Laushway had argued that the crash was predictable, and that the hosts should have seen it coming because they knew Desormeaux was unfit to drive.

Eric Williams, the lawyer for the hosts, argued in court that his clients had not served Desormeaux the alcohol and could not have known how much he had consumed or exactly how drunk he was when he drove off.

Williams also argued that a finding of social host liability could unfairly burden any Canadian who has friends over to share a drink.

A lawyer who represented the Insurance Board of Canada at the high court hearing said he was satisfied with the decision. "The court did the right thing," Alan D'Silva told CBC News, adding that "the court has essentially closed the door to these kinds of claims. ... It affirmed what we had said that it was not appropriate to extend the duty to social hosts that exists in a commercial host context."

The Insurance Board of Canada had predicted a spike in both lawsuits and insurance premiums if the Supreme Court ruled in Childs's favour.