Pedestrian Hit by a Car in a Parking Lot in Ontario: Who Is Responsible?
- Jun 4
- 8 min read
A pedestrian hit by a car in a parking lot in Ontario can still have a personal injury claim. The claim can involve driver negligence, the layout or maintenance of the property, or both. The legal analysis can also differ from a pedestrian collision on a roadway because Ontario’s reverse-onus rule under the Highway Traffic Act does not automatically apply to every private parking lot collision.
Parking lot pedestrian accidents are often treated as simple low-speed collisions. They should not be. A vehicle backing out of a space, turning through a laneway or exiting a plaza can cause serious injuries, especially to older pedestrians, children and people already walking with limited mobility.
Our Ontario pedestrian accident lawyers represent people injured in serious pedestrian collisions, including parking lot, driveway, plaza, school, apartment and commercial-property accidents.
Why Are Parking Lot Pedestrian Claims Different?
Pedestrian lawyers analyzed a vehicle striking a pedestrian on a public road usually as a motor vehicle collision involving a pedestrian. However, the analysis is different when a pedestrian struck in a private parking lot.
Of course, the driver’s conduct still matters. Drivers in parking lots must watch carefully, travel at a safe speed, check before backing up and pay attention to people walking between vehicles, across lanes and near entrances.
However, the nature of a the specific parking lots' property can become relevant. A parking lot is designed, maintained and controlled by someone. Poor lighting, blocked sightlines, snowbanks, confusing traffic flow, missing signage, faded markings or unsafe pedestrian routes can all affect how the collision happened.
That means claims sometimes look beyond the driver. Depending on the facts, the owner, tenant, property manager, snow-removal contractor, maintenance company or another occupier may need to be considered.
Serious parking lot pedestrian claims should not be treated as mini car accidents since they sometimes involves both motor vehicle negligence and premises liability.
Does the Highway Traffic Act Reverse Onus Apply in a Parking Lot?
Ontario has a reverse-onus rule for some pedestrian collisions.
Section 193 of the Highway Traffic Act provides that, where loss or damage is sustained by reason of a motor vehicle on a highway, the owner, driver, lessee or operator bears the onus of proving that the loss or damage did not arise through negligence or improper conduct.
That rule is very significant when dealing with roadway pedestrian accidents as it changes the burden of proof. The driver and owner must disprove negligence or improper conduct rather than leaving the injured pedestrian to prove driver negligence in the ordinary way.
A parking lot collision requires a more careful analysis since the reverse onus is tied to a motor vehicle on a “highway” under the Highway Traffic Act. Some areas that look private or semi-private can raise legal questions about whether they fall within the statutory definition. But a purely private parking lot should not automatically be treated the same way as a public roadway for the purpose of section 193.
This can mean that parking lot pedestrian claims are subject to ordinary negligence principles, occupiers’ liability principles, or both.
For a more fulsome explaination of the reverse-onus rule in roadway pedestrian claims, see our article on who is at fault in a pedestrian accident in Ontario.
Driver Negligence in a Parking Lot Pedestrian Accident
Drivers often underestimate the level of care required in parking lots. Parking lots are full of pedestrians. People walk to and from stores, offices, schools, medical appointments, apartment buildings and parked vehicles. Children can be near parents. Older pedestrians may walk slowly. Shoppers may be carrying bags. People can step from between parked vehicles.
Drivers cannot treat a parking lot lane like an ordinary road. Driver negligence with marking lots could include:
backing out without a proper lookout;
relying only on mirrors or a backup camera;
turning too quickly through a parking-lot lane;
failing to watch for pedestrians near a store entrance;
driving too fast for the confined space;
cutting across marked spaces or lanes;
exiting a driveway or plaza entrance without checking the sidewalk; or
driving while distracted by a phone, navigation system or passenger.
reversing vehicle collisions deserve particular attention. A driver reversing from a space or driveway usually has limited visibility and must take care before moving. The fact that the vehicle was moving slowly does not prevent serious injury, particularly if the pedestrian is knocked down and lands hard on pavement.
When the Property Owner or Occupier May Be Involved
Parking lot pedestrian claims can occasionally involve more than the driver. Under Ontario’s Occupiers’ Liability Act, an occupier of premises owes a duty to take reasonable care in the circumstances to see that people entering the premises are reasonably safe. The Act also says that this duty applies whether the danger is caused by the condition of the premises or by an activity carried on there.
Keep in mind that the legal standard is reasonableness, not perfection. A property owner is not automatically liable because a pedestrian was struck in a parking lot.
But the property can be relevant if the design, condition or operation of the parking lot contributed to the collision. Examples where contribution may apply include:
poor lighting in pedestrian areas;
snowbanks blocking sightlines;
faded or missing directional arrows;
confusing traffic flow;
unsafe pedestrian routes near store entrances;
missing stop signs or warning signs;
badly placed cart corrals, dumpsters or landscaping;
obstructed sidewalks or walkway exits;
inadequate maintenance after snow or ice; or
a layout that forces pedestrians into vehicle lanes unnecessarily.
Parking Lot Accidents Involving Snowbanks, Ice and Poor Visibility
Winter conditions will sometimes make parking lot pedestrian cases more complex. Large snowbanks can block sightlines at plaza exits, aisle ends and pedestrian crossings. Ice can cause a pedestrian to move slowly, lose balance or fall after contact with a vehicle. Poorly maintained walking routes can push pedestrians into vehicle lanes. Darkness and inadequate lighting can make it harder for both drivers and pedestrians to see each other.
This setup could lead to a driver may say the pedestrian was difficult to see. The pedestrian may say the driver moved too quickly or failed to check before backing up. The property owner may need to answer questions about lighting, snow storage, sanding, salting, inspection and maintenance.
A proper investigation should separate the issues rather than letting each potential defendant point at someone else. The driver’s conduct and the condition of the premises can both contribute to the same collision.
What If the Pedestrian Was Walking Behind a Reversing Vehicle?
Many parking lot pedestrian accidents involve backing vehicles. A driver backing out of a parking space, driveway or loading area must take reasonable care to ensure the movement can be made safely. Backup cameras and sensors can help, but they do not replace the driver’s obligation to look carefully and respond to the surroundings.
The defence might try to argue that the pedestrian walked into the path of the vehicle or passed too closely behind it. That can be relevant, but it does not end the claim.
The analysis can include:
whether the driver checked mirrors and blind spots;
whether the driver looked over their shoulder;
how quickly the vehicle reversed;
whether the pedestrian was visible before impact;
whether the backup lights were working;
whether alarms or sensors sounded;
whether the pedestrian had a reasonable path around the vehicle; and
whether parked vehicles, snowbanks or lighting affected visibility.
These cases are often fact-specific. A pedestrian’s position behind the vehicle is important, but so is the driver’s lookout and the layout of the parking area.
Can the Pedestrian Be Found Partly at Fault?
Yes. A pedestrian can be found partly at fault in a parking lot collision. But partial fault does not defeat the claim. Under Ontario’s Negligence Act, where damages are caused or contributed to by the fault or negligence of more than one party, responsibility can be divided. This means that a pedestrian’s damages can be reduced if the pedestrian is found partly responsible.
In a parking lot case, an insurer might be able to argue that the pedestrian:
walked behind a reversing vehicle;
crossed outside a marked walkway;
failed to watch for moving vehicles;
wore dark clothing at night;
was distracted by a phone;
moved suddenly from between parked cars; or
failed to use a safer available route.
However its important to remember that drivers in parking lots are expected to anticipate people walking through them. Property owners and occupiers may also have responsibilities for the way pedestrian and vehicle movement is organized.
Fault is not always all-or-nothing. A driver, pedestrian and occupier can each be assessed according to their role in the collision.
Relevant Evidence in a Parking Lot Pedestrian Claim
Parking lot cases often depend on evidence that disappears quickly. Video is usually the first priority. Commercial plazas, grocery stores, schools, apartment buildings, medical offices and parking garages often have surveillance cameras. Nearby businesses, dashcams and doorbell cameras can also capture parts of the collision.
The problem is that footage may be overwritten quickly. A request to preserve it should be made as early as possible.
Other important evidence can include:
photographs of the vehicle and impact area;
photographs of sightlines from the driver’s seat;
lighting conditions at the same time of day;
snowbanks, ice, puddles or surface defects;
parking-lot markings, arrows and signage;
witness names and contact information;
incident reports created by the property owner or business;
snow-removal, salting or inspection records;
maintenance contracts;
police or collision reports; and
medical records documenting injuries shortly after the collision.
In serious injury cases, reconstruction evidence may also be needed. Vehicle speed, backing distance, pedestrian visibility, impact location and reaction time can become important where liability is disputed.
Accident Benefits After a Parking Lot Pedestrian Collision
Pedestrians hit by a motor vehicle in a parking lot can apply for Statutory Accident Benefits where the incident qualifies as an accident under the SABS. Keep in mind, that being at fault does not prevent an Accident Benefits claim.
Accident Benefits are separate from a lawsuit against a negligent driver or property occupier. Subject to the SABS and the applicable insurance coverage, they can help fund treatment, rehabilitation and other available benefits after a motor vehicle collision.
Frequently Asked Questions About Pedestrians Hit in Parking Lots
Can I sue if I was hit by a car in a private parking lot in Ontario?
Yes. A pedestrian hit by a car in a private parking lot can still have a claim. The claim may involve driver negligence, occupiers’ liability or both. The legal analysis may differ from a roadway pedestrian collision because the Highway Traffic Act reverse-onus rule does not automatically apply to every private lot.
Is the driver automatically at fault if they hit a pedestrian in a parking lot?
No. Drivers are not automatically at fault. Parking lots require careful driving since pedestrians are expected to be walkinig in the area, but responsibility depends on the evidence. The pedestrian’s conduct, driver’s lookout, vehicle movement and property conditions can all matter.
Can the property owner be responsible for a parking lot pedestrian accident?
Yes, potetntially. A property owner, tenant, manager or other occupier may be involved if the parking lot layout, lighting, signage, snowbanks, ice, maintenance or pedestrian routing contributed to the collision.
What if I was hit by a car backing out of a parking space?
Backing-vehicle cases often turn on visibility, speed, driver lookout, backup lights, mirrors, cameras, blind spots and whether the pedestrian had a reasonable path of travel. The fact that a driver was backing up slowly does not automatically prevent a claim.
Can I still claim Accident Benefits after being hit in a parking lot?
Yes. A pedestrian struck by a motor vehicle in a parking lot can apply for Statutory Accident Benefits where the incident qualifies as an accident under the SABS. Fault does not prevent the claim. The insurer responsible for handling the claim depends on Ontario’s insurance priority rules and the facts.
What evidence should be preserved after a parking lot pedestrian accident?
Video should be requested quickly. Photos of the area, vehicle damage, lighting, snowbanks, signage, markings, sightlines and pedestrian routes can also be important. Incident reports, witness names, maintenance records and medical records should be preserved where possible.
Speak With an Ontario Pedestrian Accident Lawyer After a Parking Lot Collision
A pedestrian struck whille walking in a parking lot may have a claim against the driver, the property occupier or more than one party. These cases require careful analysis because the legal test can differ from a roadway pedestrian collision, especially where private property, visibility, maintenance or parking-lot design contributed to the injury.
Foster Injury Law's personal injury lawyers represent pedestrians injured in serious motor vehicle collisions throughout Ontario. If you were hit by a vehicle in a parking lot and suffered a serious injury, speak with our Ontario pedestrian accident lawyers about the insurance claim, the lawsuit and the evidence needed to protect your claim.
