Law360 Canada ( July 6, 2022, 5:45 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Theriault from the dismissal of her claim against Avery’s Farm Markets Limited (Avery’s) on the grounds that she was unfairly treated at trial by virtue of the judge removing a document from the common documents book at the close of Avery’s case, and by Avery’s trial tactics. Theriault stopped at Avery’s and as she approached the table, her right foot slid forward. Her fall and the time before and immediately after, was captured on surveillance video. Theriault brought a claim against Avery’s in which she alleged it had breached its obligation under the Occupiers’ Liability Act (OLA). She asserted she suffered injuries as a result of the fall and sought damages. After having heard the evidence and submissions of counsel, the judge found Theriault did not prove Avery’s breached its duty under the OLA and dismissed her claim. Immediately after Theriault closed her case, Avery’s advised it intended to bring a motion for non-suit on the basis Theriault had not produced evidence upon which a finding of liability against it could be made. Theriault advised the judge that the parties agreed in advance of the trial that the contents of the common documents book were to be introduced into evidence and the surveillance video and Incident Report constituted part of the record. Avery’s denied the existence of such an agreement. The trial judge found no agreement was made regarding the admission and use of the Incident Report at trial. The judge concluded the fact Avery’s did not object to its inclusion in the common documents book did not establish the parties agreed it would be entered into evidence. It was not part of the evidentiary record for the purposes of the non-suit motion, as it had not been introduced as part of the Theriault’s case....