Legal Update
Bad Faith
Personal Injury
Insurance
Evidence
Most Recent Articles
$90,000 damages for chronic neck and back pain.
On March 30, 2016, the BC Supreme Court assessed damages for chronic soft tissue injuries suffered in two motor vehicle accidents (“MVAs”). In Niijar v. Hill the plaintiff was involved in two MVAs, the first in 2010 the second in 2012. The defendants admitted liability for both accidents. As a result of one or both of the accidents, the plaintiff suffered from chronic neck and back soft tissue injuries which continued to the time of trial and were expected to continue into the future. The Court assessed non-pecuniary damages at...
read moreCFL concussion case fails for lack of jurisdiction.
On March 11, 2016, the Chief Justice of the BC Supreme Court dismissed a case brought by a former BC Lions football for concussion related injuries, on the basis of wording in the league and player’s collective bargaining agreement. In Bruce v. Cohon, 2016 BCSC 491, the plaintiff, who played professional football with the CFL from 2001 – 2014, sued the league and its individual teams alleging that his career led to multiple concussions and sub-concussive injuries and he was negligently allowed to continue playing while displaying these...
read moreICBC punished for fraud allegation.
On March 1, 2016, the BC Supreme Court ordered ICBC to pay $350,000 in punitive damages for malicious prosecution after alleging that the plaintiff acted fraudulently following a pedestrian collision. In Arsenovski v. Bodin, 2016 BCSC 359, the plaintiff was walking with her husband when he was struck by a vehicle. The plaintiff was not struck by the vehicle but did fall down and suffer some modest injuries during the incident and she reported this to ICBC. Specifically she told ICBC that “the last thing I remember was stepping off the curb...
read moreTrial adjourned due to uncertain prognosis.
On February 16, 2016, the BC Supreme Court granted an application to adjourn a personal injury trial in the face of uncertain medical evidence about the plaintiff’s prognosis. In Gee v. Basra, 2016 BCSC 427, the plaintiff was injured in a 2011 motor vehicle accident for which the defendant admitted liability. The plaintiff suffered chronic headaches and the her physician was uncertain as to her prognosis, noting that a course of Botox injections may prove helpful, stating that: Jodene [the plaintiff] is now four years post injury and...
read moreManulife applied to have me disqualified from suing them, and lost.
On November 30, 2015, the BC Supreme Court dismissed arguments by the Manufacturer’s Life Insurance Company, attempting to have me disqualified from acting as plaintiff ‘s counsel in a breach of contract claim against them.
read moreIf causes are not “divisible” damages will flow.
Ms. K. suffered whiplash type injuries in a 2007 car accident. Her pain became chronic and she became depressed. The consensus of the medical experts at her trial was that “her chronic pain is unlikely to resolve and the focus of her treatment should be on pain management, not cure.” Ms. K. admitted that she had a troubled childhood. also, a few years after her accident she experienced a torn rotator cuff, then shoulder surgery and then a frozen shoulder which were all unrelated to her accident. In K. v. Galasinao, 2015 BSSC 1532, Mr. Justice...
read moreICBC doctor a “very unhelpful medical witness”.
On December 23, 2015, the BC Supreme Court criticized a defence expert witness for crossing the line into advocacy. In Ferguson v. McLaughlin the plaintiff was injured in a 2009 collision caused by the defendant. The defendant’s insurer hired a physician who presented evidence largely discounting the connection of the plaintiff’s complaints to the collision. In rejecting this evidence Madam Justice Griffin made the following pointed comments: [63] The defendant called the...
read more$3 million “diminished capacity” award for brain injury.
On December 14, 2015, the BC Supreme Court assessed damages of $3 million dollars for a plaintiff who sustained a brain injury in a vehicle collision. In Grassick v. Swansburg the plaintiff, who was 16 at the time, was a pedestrian and struck by a vehicle driven by the defendant. The plaintiff suffered a moderate to severe brain injury which impacted his cognition and was expected to have permanent repercussions. The Court found that the plaintiff was an ambitious and hard working young man who, but for the brain injury, would have had a...
read moreExpert did not meet with, examine or interview plaintiff = NO WEIGHT.
On November 30, 2015, the BC Supreme Court rejected the opinion of a defence retained doctor who “did not meet with, examine or interview” the plaintiff but nonetheless authored a report opining on the plaintiff’s injuries. In Preston v. Kontzamanis Mr. Justice Parrett provided the following critical comments for medico-legal practices: [125] The defendant provided and relied upon what purported to be an independent medical report (IME) by Dr. Boyle. [126] Dr. Boyle readily...
read moreJury can know about all defence medical examinations.
On November 27, 2015, the BC Supreme Court confirmed that it is fair game for plaintiffs to testify that they attended a defence medical exam where no report was produced and the defence is not relying on opinion evidence from their expert. In Norris v. Burgess the plaintiff alleged injury as a result of two collisions. The defendants denied any injury occurred. In the course of the lawsuit the plaintiff attended a defence medical appointment with a psychiatrist. The defendants “chose not to obtain a medical opinion from the psychiatrist”...
read more
