Tony Jenkins 1s ‘Manager, Insurance & Ops Risk ‘Vd0s 78 Uy ES | ARCRIVER | 20-t6- 201 iiefaort WM rene. (1 - Ui \ = = ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN! Chadrick John Veenhof Plaintiff and Cineplex Odeon Corporation and Jane Doe Defendants STATEMENT OF CLAIM ‘TO THE DEFENDANTS: A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the plaintiff. ‘The claim made against you is set out in the following pages. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for you ‘must prepare a statement of defence in Form I8A prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure serve it on the plaintiffs" lawyers, or, where the plaintiffs do not have a lawyer, serve it on the plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, WITHIN TWENTY DAYS afier this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served in Ontario. or in the United States of IF you are served in another province or tortitory of Canad Anetiea, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days, Ifyou are served cerve and file a notice of intent stead of serving and filing a statement to defend in Form ISB prescribed by the Rules of C days within which to serve and file your statement of defence, This will entitle you to ten more IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING BUT ARE UNABLE TO PAY LEGAL FEES, LEGAL AID MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU BY CONTACTING A LOCAL AID OFFICE. IF YOU PAY THE PLAINTIFE’S CLAIM, and $1.000,00 for costs, within the time for four statement of defence you may move to have this proceeding dismissed by serving and filPage 2 of 10 the court. If you believe the amount claimed for costsis excessive, you may pay the plaintiff's claim and $500 for costs and have the costs assessed by the court, Y 5 Date of Issuer J) yyy 3D 2011 Local Registrar ADDRESS OF COURT OFFICE: Guelph Court House Ontario Superior Court of Justice 74 Woolwich St, Guelph ON NIH 379 TO: Cineplex Odeon Corporation 1303 Yonge Street Toronto, Ontario M4 2 9 AND TO: Jane DoePage 3 of 10 CLAIM ‘The Plaintiff, Chadrick Veenhof, claims as against the Defendants: a) damages in the amount of $10,000,000.00; b) prejudgment and post-judgment interest pursuant to sections 128 and 129 of the Courts of Justice Act; ©) his costs of this action on a substantial indemnity basis plus HST; and d) such further and other relief as this Honourable Court may deem just. PARTIES ‘The Plaintiff, Chadrick Veenhof, (hereinafter “Veenhof") was boin on July 16, 1988, and er, in the Province of Ontario and was at all material times an resides in the City of Kiteher invitee of the lands and premises Iecated at 500 Fairview Road South, ia the City of rio, and as such was owed a dury of eure. wer, in the Province of On Kite ‘The Defendant, Cineplex Odeon Corporation (hereinafter “Cineplex”), isa corporation duly incorporated pursuant to the laws of the Province of Ontario. and was at all material times the owner and/or occupier of the lands and premises located at 500 Fairview Road South, in the City of Kitchener. in the Province of Ontario, (hereinafter “Premises”), and as such wasPage 4 of 10 responsible forthe care, control and maintenance ofthe Premises, under terms and conditions both unknown to the Plaintiff at this time. The Defendant, Jane Doe (hereinafter “Doe”), was at all material times an employee of the Defendant, Cineplex. THE PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that on June 22, 2009 at or about 10:30 p.m., he was a patron of the Defendant, Cineplex, where he attended to watch a movie. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that as he was eating popeom which was purchased from the Defendant, Cineplex, he began to asphyxiate on the popcom. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, further alleges that as he was asphysiating on the popcorn, the servants, a ex, including the Defendant, Jane Doe, re tiff, Veenho! J serious and permanent injuries to and about his body, the particulars of which are hereinafter set ou that the accident referred to in pars The Plaintiff, Veenhof, al graph 5, was caused by the negligence of the Defendant, Jane Doe, for whose negligence the Defendant, Cineplex. is liable at law, the particulars of which include, but are not limited to, the following:b, 8. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, further all ge Sof 10 they failed to administer emergency medical care notwithstanding that they had qualified medical personnel on the Premises: their servants, agents, and/or employees, including the Defendant, Jane Doe, prevented the Plaintiff from receiving medical intervention from certified patrons, when they knew or ought to have known that immediate medical attention was required; they failed to call emergeney services in time or at all, they failed to implement reasonable emergency policies, protocols and procedures, in time or at all; they failed to raise the lighting in the cinema and/or stop the movie, despite there bei I situation; in emi ney med they failed to comply with their own intemal policies; they failed to instruct their employees as to proper emergency procedures, in time or they failed to with ; and/or, they had the last clear chance to avoid the accident and they failed to do so. s that the Defendants are vi riously liable for the mployees andior contractors. .gligence of their respective servants.Page 6 of 10 8. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, pleads and relies, inter alia, upon the provisions of the Occupiers Liability Act R.S.O, 1990 ¢, O.2., particularly section 3. By virtue thereof, the Defendant, Cineplex, was under a positive duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the ease ‘were reasonable to ensure that persons entering on the Premises were reasonably safe while con the Premises. THE PLAINTIFF'S INJURIES 9, The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that as a result of the accident, he has and will sustain serious injuries to and about his body, including, but not limited to, the followin a severe anoxic brain injury’ b, loss of vision; conductive hearing foss in his left car £ dysphagia: 8 dysarthria: h aphasia; nd right hemiparesis; ostepenia: tring spasticity;Page 7 of 10 1 incontinence; m. adjustment disorder, and, a, scarring, 10. ‘The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that he will sustain a permanent, partial disability for therest of his life, TREATMENT i The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that following the accident, he was taken to the hospital by ambulance where he received emergency treatment and was induced into a coma. 12. ‘The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that he has undergone surgery including a tracheostomy, a eystoscopy, and tendon release surgery, Phe Plaintiff, Veenhot, alleges that he bas been treated with & program of hospitatization, surgery, induced coma, physiotherapy, MRI's, CT scans, occupational therapy, speech language therapy, personal support work, social work, medical treatment, diagnostic imaging, analgesics and restPage 8 of 10 FURTHER TREATMENT 14. The Plaintiff. Veenhof, alleges that he will require further medical care, speech language therapy, neurological and psychological therapy, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, massage therapy, and chiropractic treatment, in the foreseeable future, the full particulars of which are unknown to him at this time. PAIN AND SUFFERING 15, ‘The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that he has sustained and will sustain severe pain and suffering as a result of this accident LOSS OF HOUSEKEEPING AND HOME MAINTENANCE, liminution of his ability to carry on his housekeeping and home maintenance activities LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE 17. ‘The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that as a result of the accident, his enjoyment of life has been irretrievably lessened and impaired.Page 9 of 10 18 ‘The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that as a result of the accident, he has been unable to participate in his usual social, recreational, household, athletic, and other activities which he enjoyed prior to the accident, LOSS OF INCOME, COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE & EARNING CAPA 19. The Plaintiff, eenhof, alleges that he has and will sustain a loss of income. 20. The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that he has and will sustain a loss of his competitive economic advantage in the marketplace. OUT OF POCKET EXPENSES 1, The Plaintiff, Veenhof, alleges that he has and will incur health care STATUTES RELIED UPON 22. The Plainti pleads and relies upon the provisions of the following statutes: a) Occupiers’ Liability Act, RS.O. 1990 Chapter 0.2 . as amended:Page 10 of 10 b) Courts of Justice Act, R.S.0. 1990, Chapter C43, as amended; and ©) Negligence Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter N.1, and the amendments made thereto. JURISDICTION DATEOF Issue: J/}@4y 3D ,2011 The Plaintiff, Veenhof, proposes that this action be tried in the City of Guelph. Name, address, telephone and fax number of lawyers for Plaintiff PRESZLER LAW FIRM 65 Queen Street West, Ste. 400 Toronto, Ontario MSH 2MS David E. Preszler LSUC #556406, Telephone: Fax‘ARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUS COMMENCED AT 416-364 416-364. awyers