Corrie v. Gilbert

Corrie v. Gilbert

The appeal was allowed and the Court held that damages must be fixed by reference to the plaintiff's condition at trial with allowance for probable future developments but not speculative possibilities; the Court of Appeal erred by discounting damages on the basis that the pre-existing vascular condition would likely have worsened absent the accident and by substituting its view of the evidence for the jury's. A reduced but substantial award of $8,000 to the injured plaintiff was appropriate.

Citation
[1965] SCR 457
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: George David Corrie; Plaintiff Appellant: Mabel Lillian Corrie; Defendant Respondent: Vernon Letton Gilbert
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 April 1965
Procedural Posture
Tort Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Accident) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of Appeal varied.
Legal Topics
Assessment of General Damages, Pre Existing Condition and Thin Skull Rule, Jury Verdict Review and Remittitur, Causation, Future Medical Contingencies
Source Language
English
Torts Civil Procedure Damages Assessment of General Damages Pre Existing Condition and Thin Skull Rule Jury Verdict Review and Remittitur Causation Future Medical Contingencies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George David Corrie

Plaintiff Appellant

Mabel Lillian Corrie

Plaintiff Appellant

Vernon Letton Gilbert

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tort Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Accident) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper basis for assessing general damages for personal injury
  2. 2 Whether pre-existing disability should reduce defendant's liability
  3. 3 Whether jury award of $20,000 was excessive and subject to reduction

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed and the Court held that damages must be fixed by reference to the plaintiff's condition at trial with allowance for probable future developments but not speculative possibilities; the Court of Appeal erred by discounting damages on the basis that the pre-existing vascular condition would likely have worsened absent the accident and by substituting its view of the evidence for the jury's. A reduced but substantial award of $8,000 to the injured plaintiff was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of Appeal varied.

Orders

  • Increase general damages awarded to female appellant Mabel Lillian Corrie to $8,000 (from $3,000 ordered by Court of Appeal).
  • Costs awarded to appellants.