CASE LAW - Siegrist v Wiens
The case of Siegrist v Wiens takes place on Highway 1 near Canoe. 17 year old Kenton Wiens was driving a farm tractor pulling a hay wagon loaded with large round bales southbound. Helen Siegrist was following behind in a Nissan Sentra. When oncoming traffic cleared, Mrs. Siegrist attempted to pass Mr. Wiens.
As Mrs. Siegrist begun to pass the trailer, Mr. Wiens turned right into the driveway of Steiner Farm. The rear of the trailer swung into the northbound lane and contacted the front passenger door of the Sentra. The vehicle left the road, coming to a stop in the ditch beside the highway and catching fire. Both Mr. Wiens and other motorists were involved in rescuing Mrs. Siegrist and her husband who was a passenger in the car.
The Siegrists were taken to hospital, treated and released.
Justice Wetherill decided that Mr. Wiens was entirely responsible for the collision:
 I conclude that Mr. Wiens knew from his experience operating the Tractor/Hay Wagon that the rear of the Hay Wagon would swing like a pendulum around its centre wheels and swing out about twenty feet as it turned. Mr. Wiens also knew from his experience that by driving the Tractor/Hay Wagon unit along the highway, he would impede vehicles travelling at highway speed and that vehicles would pass him, as he testified he invited them to do. He would also have known or should have known that the large hay bales he was hauling obscured the Tractor’s lights and turn signals such that vehicles following the Tractor would have no indication of an impending turn.
 A reasonably prudent driver in Mr. Wien’s position would have known or expected vehicles following the Tractor/Hay Wagon to pass him and he had a duty to ensure that prior to turning into the Driveway, there were no vehicles behind that were attempting to pass. Knowing that the Hay Wagon would swing into the north-bound lane, it was not reasonable for him to initiate the turn when the potential for vehicles to pass was present.
 Mr. Wiens had the obligation to control the Hay Wagon and know where the rear of it would be at any given time. He had the onus to accommodate the risk of the plaintiff passing the Hay Wagon while it pivoted into her: