30 Dec Etson v. Loblaw Companies Limited (Real Canadian Superstore)

           On November 28, 2008, the plaintiff, then 76 years old, tripped over the corner of a wooden pallet in the defendant’s Superstore, fell down, and broke her hip.  She had surgery to pin her hip together but within nine months the hardware failed and she had to have two further operations: one to remove the hardware and another to replace her entire hip.  Fortunately, the last surgery was successful and the plaintiff is finally on the road to recovery....

Read More

20 Dec Curak v. Brown

             It was a busy morning in chambers when the parties appeared before me on the defendants’ application for an order that the plaintiff in this personal injury action attend for two independent medical examinations, the first booked for the following week.  The application threatened to exceed the estimate provided by counsel, not an unusual circumstance but one which resulted in part of the application being adjourned for written submissions.  Given that one of the examinations was scheduled for the following week and that the parties were in partial agreement, I made the order for the plaintiff to attend the two independent medical examinations as follows:          (a)      an examination by orthopaedic surgeon Dr. John Oliver on Friday December 3, 2010 at 1:00 p.m.; and     (b)      a work capacity evaluation with occupational therapist Jeff Padvaiskas on Monday January 10, 2011 at 8:30 a.m....

Read More

25 Nov Kinnear v. Canadian Recreational Excellence (Vernon) Corporation

             THE COURT:  In September 2006, the plaintiff attended a Vernon Vipers hockey game at the Multiplex in Vernon. The Multiplex is a sports and convention facility owned by the defendant, the Regional District of North Okanagan (“NORD”), and operated and maintained at the time the defendant, Canadian Recreational Excellence (Vernon) Corporation (“CRE”)....

Read More

19 Nov British Columbia (Director of Child

           This is an appeal pursuant to s. 81 of the Child, Family and Community Service Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 46, from the decision of Judge R.R. Smith of the Provincial Court of British Columbia of June 16, 2010.  In his decision, Judge Smith denied the Director’s application for a declaration that the child, M.K.M., was in need of protection pursuant to s. 40 of the Child, Family and Community Service Act....

Read More

19 Nov Van Swieten v. McIntyre

             THE COURT:  This is the application of the third party to strike the claim against her pursuant to Rule 9‑5(1)(a), (b), (c), and (d).  In the action, the plaintiff claims damages arising from injuries she sustained September 30, 2009, as a result of the alleged negligence of the defendants....

Read More

28 Oct Hall Estate (Re)

             Mr. John M. Sims, past committee and current executor of the estate of Gordon Anderson Hall, applies for two heads of relief (to quote the application):  to pass his accounts for the period February 28th, 2005 through May 19th, 2009 andto recommend a fair and reasonable allowance for Mr. Sims for his care, pain, trouble, and time expended in and about the estate in administering, disposing of, arranging, and settling the affairs of the estate during the same period.  ...

Read More

19 Oct Patterson v. Williams

             The third party applies under Rule 9-8(5) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, B.C. Reg. 168/2009, for an order that the defendant, Jennifer Lynn Williams, pay the third party’s costs of defending the third party proceedings. ...

Read More

19 Oct E.B. v. Basi

             THE COURT:  This proceeding involves tort claims against the alleged assailants of an infant, E.B., while in foster care as well as against the Provincial Director of Child Welfare (the “Director”) and the provincial Crown (the “ministry”). E.B. apparently suffered a severe traumatic brain injury as a result of the alleged assault and requires an extremely high level of care at all times....

Read More

18 Oct DeMerchant v. Chow and A-1 Fire Supplies

             The defendants/applicants seek two orders in these proceedings:          1.       That the plaintiff is competent to give evidence on his own behalf in these proceedings, and          2.       That the defendants are granted leave to examine for discovery the plaintiff at such time and place as may be decided by counsel for the parties....

Read More