“Minor Injury”, “Serious Impairment” and “Fibromyalgia” Learn More!

This is an important decision from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta referenced as Jones v. Stepanenko, 2016 ABQB 295 (CanLII). The Plaintiff in this case was 19 years of age.  She was involved in a serious collision when she was rear-ended by an SUV, causing 12,000 damage to the Defendant vehicle.  The Plaintiff’s […]

Read more "“Minor Injury”, “Serious Impairment” and “Fibromyalgia” Learn More!"

Agony of Collision Doctrine

Agony of Collision This post will identify a number of cases that have plead the doctrine of agony of collision, including a few 2018 decisions. Let’s begin by asking the question:  What is the agony of collision doctrine? A 2018 decision referenced as Owen v. Folster, 2018 BCSC 143 describes the doctrine of agony as […]

Read more "Agony of Collision Doctrine"

Pre-existing anxiety, depression, PTSD and sleep disturbance

Pre-existing conditions need to be analyzed carefully. The Plaintiff has the onus of proving his/her claim.  When dealing with liability and fault, all the Plaintiff needs to prove is that on a balance of probabilities the defendants’ negligence caused or materially contributed to an injury.  Athey v. Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458 at paras. 13-17. This […]

Read more "Pre-existing anxiety, depression, PTSD and sleep disturbance"

Causation as it relates to psychological injury – $70,000 awarded

The Plaintiff in Fabian v. Song, 2018 BCSC 762 suffered mild to moderate soft tissue injuries including psychological injuries and was awarded $70,000 for non-pecuniary damages.  The Plaintiff’s injuries impacted his employment as a full-time painter.  However, the evidence also confirms that the year following the collision of Feb. 2013, the Plaintiff’s symptoms improved significantly. […]

Read more "Causation as it relates to psychological injury – $70,000 awarded"

Liability Split Apportioned 40% Plaintiff (Cyclist) and 60% The Defendant (Vehicle)

In Heuring v. Smith, 2018 BCSC 233 the Court assesses liability between a Plaintiff (cyclist) who failed to stop at a stop sign and the Defendant (vehicle), who did not clearly see the cyclist as a result of a “blind spot” a pillar in his vehicle.  Both parties are to blame for this collision.  The Plaintiff (Cyclist) was […]

Read more "Liability Split Apportioned 40% Plaintiff (Cyclist) and 60% The Defendant (Vehicle)"