The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial, holding that the trial judge should have considered whether the design defects made any «material contribution» to the accident. (slaw.ca)
Specifically, the defendant argued that the court lacked the power to order a new trial because the plaintiff had failed to pay the filing fee on time. (indianainjuryblog.com)
This conclusion was reversed by a summary conviction appeal court, and partially reversed again by the Court of Appeal, which ordered a new trial. (chartercases.com)