Edwards v. Stroink
THE COURT: These reasons are subject to editorial revisions before their reproduction in final form. In no manner will the results of my decision be changed.Introduction...
Welcome to the Acheson Sweeney Foley Sahota personal injury case law database.
Our firm has collected and organized a number of personal injury court decisions in a publicly-accessible database, for use as a resource by law students, other lawyers and firms, as well as the general public. This database will include some of our firm’s results, as well as results from many other lawyers. For information about results from this firm only, please click here.
The British Columbia Supreme Court and the British Columbia Court of Appeal are the sources for all of the cases in this database; these cases are not official versions of the material produced, and were not made in affiliation with or the endorsement of the British Columbia Superior Courts.
Binichakis v. Porter
The defendants apply for a summary judgment pursuant to Rule 9-6 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, B.C. Reg 168/2009 to dismiss all claims of the plaintiffs set out in a further amended notice of civil claim....
Meyer v. Lahm
This is an application by the plaintiff for production of various defence documents which have been listed as privileged documents 4.1 through 4.8....
Graham v. Wells
Cathleen Graham was barely thirty years of age when, in the year 2003, she received approximately $4 million as a result of the loss of her entire family in deaths over the previous two years. Her mother had died when a re-emerged cancer led to a cardiac arrest from which Ms. Graham was unable to save her with CPR. A motor vehicle accident took Ms. Grahams brother, her only sibling, eight weeks later. Ms. Graham then lost her father, first to a severe depression, and then irrevocably when he hanged himself in the basement of the family home. Ms. Graham found him hanging, cut him down, and administered CPR in an effort to bring him back to life, but it was too late. It is no surprise that Ms. Graham had a complex and distinctive attitude towards the money that came to her with these terrible losses....
Lloyd v. Munday
This is an application on behalf of Mr. Munday, the defendant in this motor vehicle personal injury action, to have the plaintiff, Ms. Lloyd, undergo independent medical examinations by three practitioners: a physiatrist, an orthopaedic surgeon, and a psychiatrist....
Miley v. Abulaban
There were ten exhibits entered at the hearing as follows: Exhibit 1: A binder containing the appointment, the order after trial awarding the plaintiff $193,522.16, and a subsequent order ordering that the plaintiff is entitled to double costs on tariff items 34, 35 and 36, and also granting the plaintiff entitlement to certain other costs and disbursements. Three affidavits of plaintiffs counsel, Joseph A. Zak, an affidavit of Lola Mondin, Mr. Zaks legal assistant, attaching 98 exhibits proving most of the disbursements incurred by the plaintiff, two affidavits of Christine Watson, another legal assistant to plaintiffs counsel, an affidavit of Victoria, MacIvor, another legal assistant employed by the plaintiffs law firm, two letters dealing with one of the claims, an affidavit of Kim Dolson, the office accountant for the plaintiffs law firm. Exhibit 2: The plaintiffs list of documents, amended list of documents and second amended list of documents. Exhibit 3: The defendants list of documents. Exhibit 4: A binder containing two trial transcripts, copies of the plaintiffs closing submissions and reply, and the reasons for judgment dealing with quantum, with admissibility of fresh evidence, with costs and directions and oral reasons for judgment dealing with removal from Rule 15-1 and adjournment. Exhibit 5: An affidavit of Christine Watson attaching exhibits and providing evidence with respect to the disbursements related to Dr. Kevin Wing,...
Gill v. Bhuller
The defendants admit their liability to Ms. Ronnie Gill for her injuries from a motor vehicle accident on December 23, 2010. The defendants vehicle struck the passenger's side of the vehicle Ms. Gill was driving. After the accident, Ms. Gill carried on with her day, much as she would have without the accident. She experienced her first symptoms on the following day. These reasons are confined to assessing Ms. Gill's damages....
Ducharme v. Bradler
The plaintiff, Laura Ducharme, was involved in two motor vehicle accidents in Kelowna, British Columbia on January 2, 2010 and September 7, 2010. Liability has been admitted in both actions and, accordingly, the trial before me was to address the matter of damages....
Blackman v. Dha
The plaintiff, Lorianne Elizabeth Blackman, claims damages for injuries she sustained as a result of a motor vehicle accident on August 17, 2010. At the time of the accident, Ms. Blackman was stopped at a red light on 56th Avenue in Surrey, British Columbia, waiting to turn left at the intersection of 152nd Street, when her vehicle was struck from behind by the defendant, Ms. Inderjeet Dha. This proceeding was brought under Rule 15-1 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, B.C. Reg. 168/2009....
Dholliwar v. Yu
The plaintiff was involved in three motor vehicle accidents between June 2 and August 16, 2011. He has settled his claims arising from the first two accidents. The third accident is the subject of this action in which the plaintiff claims damages for personal injury, including past and future wage loss and loss of earning capacity and opportunity to earn income. The defendants apply for production of settlement documentation relating to the claims from the June and July 2011 accidents. The defendants requested these documents at the plaintiffs examination for discovery. The plaintiff relies on the privilege attached to settlement documents. The defendants submit that privilege should be set aside to prevent double recovery by the plaintiff.BACKGROUND FACTS...
Beauchesne v. W.J. Stelmaschuk and Associates Ltd.
THE COURT: The defendant, Her Majesty The Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia, whom I will refer to in these reasons as HMTQ, applies for an order striking paragraph 21 of Part 1 and paragraph 2 of Part 3 of the notice of civil claim filed by the plaintiff in this matter as disclosing no reasonable claim under Rule 9‑5(1)(a) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules....
Cui v. Metcalfe
THE COURT: The plaintiffs claims in this action arise from injuries she suffered in an August 15, 2011 motor vehicle accident for which the defendant has admitted liability....