The following excerpt is from The Owners, Strata Plan No. VIS3578 v. John A. Neilson Architects Inc., 2010 BCCA 329 (CanLII):
Similarly here, it is not plain and obvious that claims in negligence against the individual respondents personally would be excluded under the Said v. Butt exception to the general principle outlined in London Drugs. The fact that a director, officer or employee was acting within the course of employment and the corporation is vicariously liable for his negligence does not preclude a claim in negligence against the employee personally. However, in my view, the London Drugs principle requires that claim against the individual must be based on the breach of a duty of care that would support an action against the individual personally. The material facts that support that personal claim in tort must be specifically pleaded to establish a possible cause of action under R. 15(5)(a)(iii).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.