IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Date: 20110909

Docket: 41642

Registry:
Kamloops

Between:

Joan
Vienna Miller

Plaintiff

And

Ryan
MacGregor Boughton

Defendant

Before:
Master McDiarmid

Reasons for Judgment

[1]          
Following a trial before Madam Justice Hyslop with a jury, which took
place between December 6 and 14, 2010, the plaintiff was found to be 45% liable
for a motor vehicle accident which occurred July 22, 2006, and the defendant,
55% liable. The jury assessed non-pecuniary damages at $6,000.00, $1,500.00
past wage loss and $100.00 special damages for total damages of $7,600.00,
reduced by 45%. By virtue of s. 83 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act,
R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 231, (the “Act”), there was a further reduction of
$300.00 resulting in a judgment award to the plaintiff of $3,880.00

[2]          
On January 26, 2011, an application was heard by Madam Justice Hyslop to
deal with issues resulting from the jury verdict, including the ramifications
of the defendant’s offers to settle. The application resulted in a decision and
subsequent order dated May 12, 2011, whereby the court ordered that:

a)    the plaintiff is
entitled to 55% of her costs and disbursements up to and including June 30,
2009, the defendant is entitled to 100% of his costs and disbursements
commencing July 1, 2009;

b)    the plaintiff
shall pay the $2,000.00 invoice to the Ministry of Attorney General for hearing
day fees; and

c)   
costs referenced are to be assessed in accordance with Appendix B, Scale
B.

[3]          
On August 24, 2011, the defendant’s costs were assessed by me at
$42,488.44.

[4]          
At the hearing, I was advised by counsel for the defendant that he had
exchanged emails with counsel for the plaintiff, and she had advised that she
would not be attending and had no further instructions.

[5]          
Following the assessment of the defendant’s costs, counsel for the
defendant submitted that there were problems from his client’s perspective
with, as he put it, the plaintiff “basically burying her head in the sand” and
requested that I consider giving an order that the plaintiff produce a bill of
costs and attend an assessment within a certain time. Defendant’s counsel
referred me to Rule 14-1(38).

[6]          
Obviously, defendant’s counsel’s submission was made without notice to
plaintiff’s counsel as she was not in attendance. I reserved to consider the
matter.

[7]          
I am of the opinion that the defendant has a right to know how much is
going to be owing by the plaintiff to the defendant as a result of the jury
award, liability split and defendant’s offer to settle.

[8]          
That amount needs to be determined. I am, therefore, directing the
plaintiff, through her counsel, to arrange a date with Supreme Court
scheduling, such date to be prior to October 31, 2011. Plaintiff’s counsel is further
directed to prepare an appointment to assess costs for that date, together with
the proposed plaintiff’s bill of costs, to file the appointment and deliver
same to defendant’s counsel. The appointment must be filed before September 30,
2011.

[9]          
These steps need to be taken in order to finalize matters arising from
this action and to enable the defendant to know the net amount which will be
owing by the plaintiff to him.

“Master R.W.
McDiarmid”

MASTER McDIARMID