THE COURT: In this matter, two applications are before the court. One is an application on behalf of the plaintiff for renewal of a Writ. The other is an application for dismissal for want of prosecution, brought on behalf of the defendants by an agent for the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, speaking for them, although the defendants have not been served....
On October 16, 2007, a car accident occurred at the intersection of Blue Jay Street and Sandpiper Drive in Abbotsford (the Intersection). Bethann Nerval was attempting a left turn at the Intersection at the same moment Ramandeep Khehra was proceeding southbound through the Intersection. Neither woman saw the other in time and Ms. Khehras vehicle struck Ms. Nervals vehicle broadside. Both parties were injured and have sued one another. This trial was restricted to the issue of which drivers negligence caused the collision. The measure of fault attributed to each party will govern the apportionment of their entitlement to damages, which will be tried separately from the liability issue.Undisputed Facts...
Stephen Henry claims damages for injuries arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred around 5:00 p.m. on September 17, 2008 at the intersection of King George Boulevard (King George) and 68th Avenue, in Surrey, B.C....
In a notice of application filed June 8, 2011, the defendant seeks orders with respect to production of documents, the plaintiffs attendance at an examination for discovery and the use of deposition evidence at trial....
The plaintiff was injured in a vehicle roll-over on July 8, 2006. The evidence heard during this proceeding was that she was driving east on Highway No. 1 near Langley, when her boyfriend, Mr. Hearne, grabbed the steering wheel causing the vehicle to leave the highway and overturn. Mr. Hearne was killed in the collision....
In this application the plaintiff has sought several orders. They are the following: 1. That four actions involving 10 motor vehicle accidents in which the plaintiff was involved be tried at the same time and that evidence tendered in the one action be deemed to be tendered in each and every other action.2. That a finding of liability be made in one of the actions against two defendants concerning a motor vehicle accident on April 22, 2004.3. That a finding of liability be made in the same action against two other defendants concerning a second accident on April 27, 2004.4. That the defendants and third party in all four actions be jointly and severally liable to advance the plaintiff $150,000 forthwith on account of damages, including but not limited to past and ongoing medical treatment and ongoing living expenses....
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...
In Oral Reasons for Judgment pronounced June 17, 2011, indexed at 2011 BCSC 988, I found the plaintiff 70% at fault for a motor vehicle collision, and awarded her 30% of her damages, which I assessed at $31,500, plus physiotherapy user fees. It appears that the total damages payable to the plaintiff may amount to something less than $10,000. Pursuant to s. 3 of the Negligence Act, RSBC 1998 c. 333, the plaintiff would be entitled to 30% of her costs throughout....
THE COURT: The trial of this matter was heard by me sitting with a jury from April 18 to May 4, 2011. Liability was admitted. The nature and extent of the plaintiff's injuries and the quantum of damages were in issue. The plaintiff advanced a claim described in her trial brief as having a value of $961,000. In argument, the plaintiff claimed, in addition to unspecified non-pecuniary damages, gross income loss to trial in excess of $100,000 and future pecuniary losses in the range of 265,000 to $663,000....
THE COURT: The application before me is to determine the costs to be awarded following a jury trial. The plaintiff seeks an order for 100 percent of his costs, or alternatively 50 percent of the part of the trial regarding liability and 100 percent of the part of the trial regarding damages, and that alternative position I would calculate as seeking about 75 to 80 percent of his costs....