Mediation discussions not always confidential.

On May 8, 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada carved out an important exception to the promise to keep mediation discussions confidential. Companies and their insurers rely on private mediators to settle lawsuits partly because what is discussed at mediation stays confidential. This ensures that business strategy stays under wraps and public scandal for mistakes is avoided. In 2011, Bombardier and Union Carbide tried to settle a decade-long $32,000,000 court battle through mediation. In 1997, 1998 and 2003, Bombardier bought gas tanks from Union Carbide to use in Sea-Doo personal watercraft. In...

read more

A release will not be enforced if it is against public policy.

On April 30, 2014, the BC Court of Appeal ruled in Niedermeyer v. Charlton [2014] B.C.J. No. 763, that a release signed by a plaintiff participating in a zip line activity did not defeat her claim for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision on the defendant zip line operator’s bus travelling from the zipline area. The release was contrary to public policy, which did not allow an owner/operator of a motor vehicle to contract out of liability for damages for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.. The plaintiff appealed the decision of the lower court, which at summary...

read more

Is there a duty to take cannabis?

A 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court of British Columbia illustrates just how far the debate has swung on the issue of marijuana as medicine. The judgment of Gelsby v. MacMillan (March 4, 2014, BC Supreme Court) was a routine personal injury case in many respects. The plaintiff, Jessica Glesby was injured in a motor vehicle accident, suffered various injuries, and went to trial on the issue of the “assessment of damages” (how much money would she receive for her injuries). The arguments raised by both parties were for the most part not out of the ordinary, with the defendant’s arguing that...

read more

Did Manulife make “deliberately false” statements?

On January 16, 2014, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice rejected an application by Manulife Financial to dismiss the action against it in Sells v. Manulife, 2014 ONSC 715. The judgment is found at: Sells v Manulife, 2014 ONSC 715. The plaintiffs in this action are former agents of Manulife. Their essential claim for their damages against Manulife is that Manulife made very serious but false and misleading statements regarding the plaintiffs’ work and practices while with Manulife which Manulife knew or ought to have known would make it impossible for the plaintiffs to obtain new...

read more

Pension benefits not deducted from wrongful dismissal damages.

In a decision released in 2013, IBM Canada Limited v. Waterman (“Waterman”), the Supreme Court of Canada decided that an employee was entitled to keep his pension benefits as well as the full damages awarded to him for wrongful dismissal over the same period of time. Background After 42 years of service, and at the age of 65, Richard Waterman (“Mr. Waterman”) was terminated by IBM Canada Limited (“IBM”). He was only provided with 2 months notice. At the time of termination Mr. Waterman was entitled to a full pension pursuant to IBM’s defined benefit pension plan. Over the course of his...

read more

Failure to examine plaintiff diminishes weight of expert report.

It is well established that failure of an ‘independent medical examiner’ to physically examine a patient is not, in and of itself, a reason for an expert report to be inadmissible in the BC Supreme Court. However, when a litigant relies on such a report the weight the court attaches to it is often negatively impacted.  Reasons for judgement released by the BC Supreme Court on December 31, 2013, demonstrate this. In Johal v. Meyede the plaintiff was injured in a 2010 rear end collision.  Fault was admitted by the defendant.  The plaintiff suffered injuries which were ongoing at the time of...

read more