[ 60] To begin, it is clear that the trial judge found that westbound
drivers on Green Mountain Road had unobstructed visibility of
northbound vehicles travelling on Upper Centennial Parkway
beginning when they were five metres away from the white fog
line on the right-hand side of the northbound curb lane on Upper
Centennial Parkway. In other words, drivers who would stop
before entering the intersection would have no problem seeing
northbound traffic. The trial judge said that all of the experts
agreed to this and she made no comments in her decision to
suggest that she did not accept this evidence.
[ 61] The sightline impairment evidence the trial judge accepted
for drivers on Green Mountain Road relates to a “partially
obstructed sightline” as they approach and arrive at the stop sign.
She accepted the evidence of Mr. Forbes, who said that the guardrail on Upper Centennial Parkway is a visual obstruction for
drivers on Green Mountain Road who are between ten to 25
metres away from the intersection. Mr. Forbes testified that the
road design of the intersection required that drivers turning from
Green Mountain Road onto Upper Centennial Parkway have
a 175-metre unobstructed sight distance. However, a driver
stopped at the westbound stop sign on Green Mountain Road
would only have a 47-metre sightline before the guardrail became
[ 62] While the trial judge rejected the personal observations of
Mr. Gilchrist, Mr. Gilchrist presented a photograph taken 25
metres from the intersection showing that headlights of northbound vehicles are not visible at that distance because of the
guardrail. Thomas Klement, an expert witness called by Hamilton,
agreed with this observation and it was evidently accepted by the
trial judge. The trial judge also accepted the testimony of Mr.
Forbes that the guardrail impaired sightlines for drivers travelling
on Upper Centennial Parkway, of vehicles on Green Mountain
Road. Instead of having the recommended 85 metres of sightline,
Mr. McHugh did not have an unobstructed view of traffic on Green
Mountain Road until he was 35 metres from the intersection.
[ 63] Since these findings and the evidence in their support can
fairly be extracted from the reasons, I do not accept Hamilton’s
claim that the trial judge’s finding that the sightline was
obstructed is not transparent or supported by the evidence.
[ 64] Nor do I accept the discrete palpable and overriding errors
that Hamilton claims the trial judge made in determining sightlines.
[ 65] She committed no error in rejecting the testimony of Mr.
Klement. She found that Mr. Klement was unreliable because
he did not respond to questions and was argumentative. She