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.




I.R. v. M.R.

             This is an application by I.R. under s. 17(1)(a) of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.) [the Act] to vary a spousal support order made by Parrett J. on February 18, 1993 requiring him to pay to his ex-wife, M.R., $4,400 per month. I.R. asserts that his decision to “semi-retire” with his second wife, P.R., constitutes a material change in circumstances since the making of the original order. The relief sought by I.R. on his notice of application is immediate termination of the obligation to pay spousal support. In oral argument, counsel for I.R. conceded that immediate termination of spousal support was unrealistic and proposed a reduction in monthly support to $1,779 for a three year period, after which his obligation to pay support would come to an end....

Read More

Gulbrandsen v. Mohr

             The plaintiff was injured on January 2, 2010 when riding as a passenger in a car. Liability is admitted on behalf of the defendant, Blake Mohr and the action discontinued against Albert Boyd. The trial was for the purpose of assessing damages. The plaintiff’s injuries of significance where to her upper back. She also experienced dizziness which Dr. Stanley Mah, an ear, nose and throat specialist, described as “post-traumatic vestibular dysfunction.” This appears to have resolved within weeks of the accident. She continues to complain of pain in her upper back....

Read More

Paskall v. Scheithauer

             After a 19 day trial of this personal injury action, a jury found the defendant 80 per cent liable for the plaintiff’s injuries, but awarded damages that will be less than 10 per cent of the defendant’s most recent formal offer to settle....

Read More

Henshall v. Plona

             The plaintiff seeks an order that the jury notice in this matter be struck and that the trial, currently scheduled to commence on January 7, 2013 for 25 days, proceed before a judge alone....

Read More

Kwong v. Leonard

             This action arises out of a motor vehicle accident (the “MVA”).  Liability is in dispute....

Read More

Moll v. Parmar

             This is an appeal from a Master's order of November 9, 2012 granting a defence application under Rule 7-6 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules (the “Civil Rules”) for an order that the plaintiff attend independent medical examinations (“IME”s) by physiatrist, Dr. Craig and a neuropsychologist, Dr. Williams. The plaintiff was examined by Dr. Craig on November 13, but on November 14, 2012 the Master's order was stayed by the assigned trial judge pending appeal, so the plaintiff has not attended to be examined by Dr. Williams....

Read More

Pearlman v. Critchley

             The defendants Mr. Critchley, Ms. Hocoluk, Quinlan Abrioux, ICBC, Atlantic Trading Company Ltd. and Ms. Spence seek to have Mr. Pearlman’s action dismissed. The applicants assert the plaintiff’s claims are frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the court....

Read More

Dann v. Dhaliwal

             These applications concern the right of a plaintiff to examine the corporate representative of its choosing in circumstances in which two actions have been commenced arising out of the same motor vehicle accident and the respective plaintiffs are represented by separate counsel. The defendants on this application submit that they are entitled to put forward the same individual in each action. The plaintiffs submit that they should be free to choose in each action the corporate representative they wish to examine.BACKGROUND...

Read More

Carson v. Henyecz

             Ms. Carson was injured in a motor vehicle accident when her mother backed into her while she was standing in the driveway of her mother’s home. Her mother was found to be 100 percent liable when the issue of liability was tried earlier this year. This decision deals with the assessment of damages. This assessment is complicated by Ms. Carson’s long history of ongoing psychological problems.BACKGROUND...

Read More

Boutin v. MacPherson

             On Friday, January 23, 2009, Mr. Boutin was driving southbound on Nanaimo Street in Vancouver, in the lane closest to the center line.  Mr. Boutin is entitled to take every third Friday as a non-working day and was off work on January 23.  He had driven from his home in Yaletown and was driving to a restaurant at Nanaimo and Kingsway to meet a friend for lunch....

Read More

Nemoto v. Phagura

             The plaintiff Rui Nemoto seeks damages for injuries in a motor vehicle collision that occurred on August 27, 2008. She was 13 years old at the time and was a front seat passenger in a car driven by her mother. Her brother was in the back seat. The car was stopped at a red light when it was hit from behind by the defendants’ truck. Liability is not in issue....

Read More

Ostadsaraie v. Shokri

             This assessment of costs follows upon the settlement of a personal injury claim subject to Rule 15-1 (Fast Track Litigation) approximately 55 days before the scheduled trial date. Disbursements are not in issue....

Read More

Contact us today to find the best lawyer for your case.