Canada Judgment

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Davidge v. Fairholm

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court held that the trial award of $250,000 for loss of future earning capacity already incorporated present valuation and therefore the third party's request for further present valuing was denied; no formal application to reopen or reconsider was made and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.

Court disposition

Third party's request for clarification and further present valuing denied; trial award of $250,000 for loss of future earning capacity upheld; costs awarded to the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Third party's request denied
  • Award for loss of future earning capacity of $250,000 upheld
  • Costs to the plaintiff in the cause

02

Material facts

Parties

Glen Neal Davidge

Plaintiff Counsel: D. Todd Brown

Brian Douglas Fairholm

Defendant

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

Third Party Counsel: Christopher V. Morcom

Amounts and remedies

  • Loss of Future Earning Capacity: CAD 250,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Personal Injury / Tort / Post Trial Clarification (in Chambers)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The third party requested clarification of the trial reasons and sought further present valuing (discounting) of the award for loss of future earning capacity.
Respondent
The plaintiff opposed any further discounting, noting the third party did not bring a formal application to reopen the trial or for reconsideration and did not assert a miscarriage of justice or meet reconsideration factors; plaintiff sought costs.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    2014 BCSC 2500 (Griffin J.)

    An award for loss of future earning capacity is assessed as a lump sum that is intended to take into account present value.

  2. 02

    2014 BCSC 2500 (Griffin J.)

    A party seeking to alter a trial judgment must bring a formal application to reopen or for reconsideration and satisfy the applicable factors.

  3. 03

    2014 BCSC 2500 (Griffin J.)

    Costs follow the result; the successful party is entitled to costs in the cause.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court held that the trial award of $250,000 for loss of future earning capacity already incorporated present valuation and therefore the third party's request for further present valuing was denied; no formal application to reopen or reconsider was made and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.

Obiter and limits

  • The third party did not assert a miscarriage of justice or that it met factors for reconsideration.
  • The clarification was delivered in chambers following trial reasons indexed at 2014 BCSC 1948.

Court disposition

Third party's request for clarification and further present valuing denied; trial award of $250,000 for loss of future earning capacity upheld; costs awarded to the plaintiff.

  • Third party's request denied
  • Award for loss of future earning capacity of $250,000 upheld
  • Costs to the plaintiff in the cause

Source and reliance status

Supreme Court of British Columbia · 1 December 2014

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judgment· 1 December 2014

2014 BCSC 2500

2014 BCSC 2500 Davidge v. Fairholm

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Davidge v. Fairholm, 2014 BCSC 2500 Date: 20141201 Docket: M112552 Registry: Vancouver Between: Glen Neal Davidge Plaintiff And Brian Douglas Fairholm Defendant And Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Third Party Before: The Honourable Madam Justice S. Griffin Oral Reasons for Judgment In Chambers Counsel for the Plaintiff: D. Todd Brown Counsel for the Third Party: Christopher V. Morcom Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. December 1, 2014 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. December 1, 2014 [1] THE COURT: The third party has appeared today after my trial reasons for judgment were delivered October 16, 2014, indexed at 2014 BCSC 1948. Third party has asked for "clarification" of my reasons for judgment in respect of the award of damages for loss of future earning capacity. [2] The plaintiff opposes the third party's position and notes that the third party does not bring a formal application to reopen the trial or for reconsideration, nor has the third party submitted there was a miscarriage of justice or that it would meet any of the factors for reconsideration. [3] The award of loss of future earning capacity at trial was intended to take into account all factors, including an assessment of the present value of the plaintiff's loss of future earning capacity. I concluded that the damages award for loss of

earning capacity was $250,000. It would not be in accord with my reasons for judgment to discount this further. I therefore reject the third party's position that there should be further present valuing of this loss. [4] That concludes my reasons. [5] Any submission as to costs? [6] MR. BROWN: Costs to the plaintiff as part of the trial, My Lady. [7] MR. MARCOM: Just costs in the cause, My Lady. [8] THE COURT: The costs will be to the plaintiff as the plaintiff has won the cause. "The Honourable Madam Justice S. Griffin"

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.