Canada Case Law

H.D. v. North Vancouver (District)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The District breached its duty of care by failing to maintain clear sightlines at the crosswalk and its feeder stairway such that a reasonably foreseeable risk to child pedestrians existed; the driver also breached the duty to exercise due care by approaching at an excessive speed and failing to keep an adequate lookout; the plaintiff was capable of negligence but contributory negligence was not proven; apportionment of fault is 70% to the District and 30% to the driver; on causation the traumatic brain injury and resultant sequelae (neurocognitive impairment, ADHD symptoms exacerbation, depr…

Source excerpt

• Crosswalk maintenance
• Duty of care
• Contributory negligence
• Apportionment of fault
• Causation
• Cost of future care

Read case analysis

Laley v. Anderson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held the 2014 rear-end collision materially aggravated the plaintiff’s pre-existing spinal condition, but reduced damages 25% for failure to mitigate.

• Causation
• Mitigation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• In trust claim

Read case analysis

Boal v. Parilla

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Trial judgment in a BC motor vehicle injury case awarding damages for chronic pain, headaches, psychological symptoms, income loss, future care, and an in-trust claim.

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Past loss of income
• Future loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• Contributory negligence
• Causation

Read case analysis

Heo v. Kennedy

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Rear-end collision damages trial. The court awarded Mrs. Heo $431,897.26, including future care and income loss, and dismissed the in trust claim.

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Past loss of earning capacity
• Future loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• In trust claim
• Loss of housekeeping capacity

Read case analysis

O’Mara v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court awarded damages to a pedestrian struck by a fleeing vehicle, reducing general damages for pre-existing vulnerability and assessing future loss on a part-time capacity basis.

• General damages
• Past loss of income
• Future loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• Pre-existing conditions
• Causation

Read case analysis

Shoghi v. Lin

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held two motor vehicle accidents materially contributed to chronic pain and psychiatric injury, awarding damages and dismissing the in trust claim.

• Causation
• Quantum of damages
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Future care costs
• Special damages

Read case analysis

Baglot v. Fourie

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Medical malpractice trial over a ketorolac prescribing error. The court found liability for the ulcer and related harms, with damages reduced for pre-existing Crohn's disease.

• Prescribing error
• Ketorolac (toradol)
• Duodenal ulcer
• Perforation
• Internal gastrointestinal bleeding
• Adhesions

Read case analysis

Goguen v. Di Maddalena

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court awarded damages for life-threatening accident injuries, finding a small real risk of future aortic complications and granting compensation for pain, future earning capacity, future care, and an in trust claim.

• Causation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Future care costs
• Loss of earning capacity
• In trust claim
• Expert medical causation

Read case analysis

Jossy v. Johnson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Personal injury trial from a motor vehicle collision. The court assessed competing expert evidence on injuries, future earning capacity, future care, and in-trust assistance.

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of future earning capacity
• Future care costs
• In trust claim
• Weight of expert evidence
• Rehabilitation and vocational retraining

Read case analysis

Robinson v. Bud's Bar Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

After a stag-party confrontation, the court dismissed the negligence claim against Laine Turner, found Leelund Turner liable for the push, and reduced damages 30% for contributory negligence and provocation.

• Duty of care
• Standard of care
• Causation
• Contributory negligence
• Provocation
• Volenti non fit injuria

Read case analysis