Canada Case Law

Maan v. Todd

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Defendant liable for rear-end collision; on balance the court preferred the plaintiff's neurosurgical and psychiatric experts (Drs. Heran and Waisman) over the defendant's experts and found the MVA caused chronic left-sided neck/shoulder pain (including probable TOS and ulnar neuropathy/double crush), cervicogenic headaches and materially exacerbated pre-existing PTSD and major depressive disorder leading to somatic symptom disorder; plaintiff entitled to damages assessed by a capital approach for loss of earning capacity with contingencies and specific awards for non-pecuniary loss, housekee…

Source excerpt

• Liability
• Causation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• Credibility and expert evidence

Read case analysis

Zakrzewska v. Klein

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court accepted liability and, on the balance of probabilities, found the Accident caused chronic myofascial pain, persistent post‑traumatic headaches, concussion syndrome with symptoms of mild traumatic brain injury, moderate PTSD and major depressive disorder, and aggravated pre‑existing episodic migraines; the plaintiff's credibility was generally accepted and supported by lay and expert evidence; the defendant proved some mitigation failure but not to the extent argued, resulting in a 20% discount for mitigation; damages were assessed on accepted principles (including use of minimum wa…

Source excerpt

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• Credibility and reliability
• Concussion/mild traumatic brain injury
• Psychiatric injury (ptsd, major depressive disorder)

Read case analysis

McCafferty v. Jim Pattison Industries Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Court accepted plaintiff's credibility and reliability overall, found MVA1 caused MTBI (resolved), chronic soft tissue injuries to neck/right upper back/shoulder, cervicogenic chronic headaches, disrupted sleep and mood/personality changes; MVA2 produced only brief aggravation; plaintiff unlikely to have significant lasting improvement; plaintiff failed to prove past loss of earning capacity due to insufficient evidence of lost side-work opportunities, but proved a real and substantial possibility of future pecuniary loss due to loss of capacity and the changed employment circumstances; capit…

Source excerpt

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Future care costs
• Causation
• Credibility and clinical records

Read case analysis

Murphy v. Morgan

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The trial judge erred by applying specific negative contingency deductions to non-pecuniary, past and future earning capacity awards without firm evidentiary grounding or proper legal analysis; the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside those contingency deductions and substituted higher awards: non-pecuniary $175,000; past loss of earning capacity $325,000; future loss of earning capacity $400,000.

Source excerpt

• Causation
• Contingency deductions
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Standard of review
• Intervening events

Read case analysis

Stephen v. Baker

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court found on the balance of probabilities that (1) the Baker defendants were 100% liable for the First Accident (left turn into oncoming lane), (2) Gerrard admitted and was fully at fault for the Second Accident, and the defendants are equally responsible for damages; (3) the plaintiff suffered soft tissue injuries and developed Somatic Symptom Disorder with psychiatric overlay attributable to the accidents but CRPS was not established; (4) the plaintiff is disabled from the workforce but exaggerated functional limitations, so damages are reduced from plaintiff's projections; (5) awards…

Source excerpt

• Somatic symptom disorder (ssd)
• Complex regional pain syndrome (crps)
• Causation
• Liability apportionment
• Damages (general and pecuniary)
• Credibility and surveillance evidence

Read case analysis

Salamanca v. Khela

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Defendants liable for injuries sustained in the rear-end collision; the Accident caused chronic grade II soft tissue injuries to the neck, upper torso and right shoulder, chronic migrainous headaches, sleep disruption and major depressive disorder (moderate). Pre-existing lower back pathology and the 2023 disc herniation/surgery were found not to be caused by the Accident. Pleadings were sufficiently broad to permit psychiatric claim. Non-pecuniary damages awarded $190,000; no past income loss awarded; loss of future earning capacity awarded $240,000 (three years at $80,000/year under the cap…

Source excerpt

• Causation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Cost of future care
• Psychiatric injury
• Pleadings sufficiency

Read case analysis

Rigio v. Scott

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found some defendants liable and the plaintiff contributorily negligent; the litigated accidents materially aggravated the plaintiff's pre-existing mental health and soft tissue injuries through 2015 and possibly into 2016 but did not cause the major psychiatric breakdown in 2020, which was the result of intervening non-tortious events and drug use. Physical and psychiatric injuries from the litigated accidents are treated as indivisible. Apportionment of blameworthiness across parties and plaintiff results in 22.5% attribution to the plaintiff; specific apportionments were made per…

Source excerpt

• Causation
• Apportionment
• Contributory negligence
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Medical evidence and credibility

Read case analysis

Hyde v. Witzke

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff's persistent and sometimes severe headaches are attributable to the 2017 motor vehicle accident; the defence MOH hypothesis was not proven given weak clinical support for MOH caused by simple analgesics alone and the plaintiff's symptoms did not improve when he ceased analgesics; credibility concerns required caution in assessing evidence and reduced some quantum, but overall the plaintiff established liability and entitlement to damages totalling $540,156.59.

Source excerpt

• Causation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Future care
• Special damages
• Medication overuse headache

Read case analysis

Cox v. Peabody

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the defendant solely liable for a left-turn collision and awarded the plaintiff $1,087,110.53 for injuries, income loss, future care and special damages.

• Liability
• Causation
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Future care
• Credibility assessment

Read case analysis

Fuentes v. Houghton

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Supreme Court of British Columbia damages decision awarding a pedestrian plaintiff compensation for chronic pain, earning-capacity loss, and limited future care after a motor vehicle collision.

• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Future care
• Causation
• In-trust claim
• Money management fees

Read case analysis