DaCruz v. City of Vancouver

DaCruz v. City of Vancouver

The jury verdict was set aside and a new trial ordered because the admission of prejudicial hearsay about the plaintiff by an adjuster, combined with defence counsel's improper characterisation of the plaintiff's truthfulness and the trial judge's treatment of the Portugal trip in her charge, unacceptably compromised the fairness of the trial on the crucial issue of credibility.

Citation
2000 BCCA 279
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): AMERICO C. DaCRUZ; Respondent (defendant): THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VANCOUVER
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Negligence) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Jury Verdict on Quantum; New Trial Ordered
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; jury verdict and judgment set aside
Legal Topics
Damages Quantification, Credibility of Witnesses, Hearsay Rule, Jury Verdict Review, Improper Counsel Argument, New Trial
Source Language
English
Tort Civil Procedure Evidence Negligence Appeal Damages Quantification Credibility of Witnesses Hearsay Rule +3 more

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMERICO C. DaCRUZ

Appellant (plaintiff)

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VANCOUVER

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Negligence) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Jury Verdict on Quantum; New Trial Ordered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether jury award was inordinately low or a wholly erroneous estimate of damages
  2. 2 Whether hearsay evidence of a physician's adverse opinion admitted through an adjuster was admissible and prejudicial
  3. 3 Whether defence counsel's closing submissions imputing perjury and invoking cultural stereotypes were improper and prejudicial

Ratio Decidendi

The jury verdict was set aside and a new trial ordered because the admission of prejudicial hearsay about the plaintiff by an adjuster, combined with defence counsel's improper characterisation of the plaintiff's truthfulness and the trial judge's treatment of the Portugal trip in her charge, unacceptably compromised the fairness of the trial on the crucial issue of credibility.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; jury verdict and judgment set aside

Orders

  • Set aside jury verdict and judgment entered thereon
  • Order a new trial