Guys,
This same kind of question is asked often. Commonly respondents state 'opinion' based on their feelings. I anticipate the same from this question. What is concerning about emotional responses is that they are usually founded on little legal basis. Be careful when reviewing these answers. That is one of the dangers of 'blog' sites. We tend to interact socially with others that share our interests and subsequently we enjoy a false sense of security that is provided when others share our preferred viewpoint. What I'm suggesting here is that similar to other posts, you are likely to get responses that say you are not liable.
Instead of telling you what you probably want to hear, I'm going to respond on the basis of my understanding of the law (similar systems in Canada as in the U.S.). There are two issues of legal principle you should be aware of.
The first is that your question, "Who is at fault" is suggesting that you are asking 'us' to play judge and jury without evidence, facts and from most, very little formal legal training. As implied by the earlier comment, this is likely to produce responses based on emotional preference rather than legal principles. Anyway, the first principle being indicated here is 'legal process'. One whereby evidence and testimony is presented by both a plaintiff and a defendent, reviewed and then a decision is made. In civil cases, the requirement is only to prove beyond the 'balance of probability', not 'beyond a reasonable doubt' as applies to criminal cases.
The second point is an extension of the first. During 'due process', the evidence and testimony presented by a plaintiff in a civil case is attempting to prove 'beyond the balance of probability' that you have been negligent. Your question asks 'who is at fault'. Here you have hit the proverbial nail on the head perhaps without realizing it. Recognize that you both might have a legal degree of fault! You may not be entirely responsible but only partially responsible. Of course, that's up for a judge and jury to decide based on an actual case should it become a reality.
The last point I want to make is to ask you to consider what the costs of the 'legal process' above is. The original question posed was "Who is at fault". Recognize that being liable and being sued are two different things. What is common about each is that both will cost a lot of money. This takes me to my realm in the world. Insurance! Review carefully with your insurance representatives the importance of comprehensive coverage. Not necessarily just for what you may have done 'wrong', but for protection to pay the substantial costs to prove what you have also done 'right'. For more information including some examples, see:
www.treesure.ca.
Always interested in discussing this concerning issue.
Best Wishes!
Scott
