Judge: ICBC’s expert “careless” if not “deceptive”.
In Hendry v. Ellis, 2015 BCSC 1186, the plaintiff was injured in a collision and sued for damages. The defendant’s insurer retained a doctor who minimized the connection between the plaintiff’s complaints and the collision. At trial, through cross examination, the doctor made various admissions beyond the borders of the opinion contained in the report. In criticizing the physician’s opinion as “careless” if not outright “deceptive” Mr. Justice Jenkins provided the following reasons: [26] Expert evidence tendered at trial was that the duration of soft tissue pain is considered to be 12...
read more$150,000 for bilateral wrist and femur fracture.
On June 2, 2015, the BC Supreme Court assessed damages for bilateral wrist fractures leading to permanent partial dysfunction and a femur fracture. In Ishii v. Wong the plaintiff was involved in a 2012 motorcycle collision caused by the defendant. He sustained fractures to both wrists, and his right femur. These injuries requires surgical intervention including the installation of hardware in both wrists and his right leg. His dominant wrist did not fully heal and was left with permanent dysfunction. In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $150,000 Madam Justice Gerow provided the...
read moreInsuring both tortfeasor and victim creates conflict.
On April 24, 2015, a 3-judge panel of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Divisional Court, held that where an insurer insures both the tortfeasor for liability coverage and the victim for accident benefits, the insurer should set up a firewall so that information gathered by it regarding the accident benefits claim is not available in the tort action. In Dervisholli v. Cervenak the plaintiff insured was involved in a motor vehicle collision. The insurer insured both the plaintiff’s vehicle and the defendant’s vehicle under separate automobile policies. The plaintiff brought...
read moreManulife tried to use maternity leave to reduce bonus, and lost.
On April 22, 2015, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ordered Manulife to pay damages of over $140,000 to a recruiter of financial advisors in a wrongful dismissal suit. The decision is noteworthy in that the court refused to allow Manulife to use its employee’s maternity leave as a reason to reduce her bonus payment. In Sowden v. Manulife Canada Ltd., the court ruled that Manulife owes damages to former employee Janice Sowden after she was dismissed in a “corporate restructuring”. In an earlier decision the court ruled, after a summary trial, that Sowden was entitled to...
read moreThe “Standard of Proof” does not change for subjective injuries.
On April 16, 2015, the BC Supreme Court confirmed that the standard of proof does not change for a tort claim based on subjective soft tissue injuries. In Rabiee v. Rendleman, 2015 BCSC 595, the plaintiff was involved in a 2008 rear end collision. The defendant admitted fault but disputed injury pointing in part to the fact that the collision was minor. In accepting the plaintiff sustained soft tissue injuries and assessing non-pecuniary damages at $40,000 Madam Justice Sharma provided the following comments about the standard of proof in low velocity impact prosecutions: [62] Given the...
read more
