31 Mar Martin v. Chamberlain
THE COURT: The plaintiff has applied for a review of the determination by the master, sitting as registrar, in which she disallowed disbursements relating to several MRIs....
THE COURT: The plaintiff has applied for a review of the determination by the master, sitting as registrar, in which she disallowed disbursements relating to several MRIs....
THE COURT: The plaintiff seeks a review of a decision of the master sitting as registrar in which he disallowed disbursements relating to two functional capacity evaluations and a cost of future care report. The review is brought pursuant to Rule 14-1(29). The parties do not disagree on the applicable law. They agree the master was obliged to determine whether the particular costs "were proper or reasonably necessary to the conduct of the proceeding" (Rule 14-1(2)). Further, they agree on the standard of review to be applied by this court in reviewing a registrar's order as to costs. The standard of review limits the court's intervention to circumstances in which the registrar was "clearly wrong" or has, "gone wrong on a matter of principle" (see generally Frost v. Frost, 56 B.C.R. 30 (C.A.)). The standard of review is necessarily deferential and it is so for the reasons expressed by Legg J. in Bell v. Fantini (1981), 32 B.C.L.R. 322.The Facts...
The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle on October 3, 2010. Liability is admitted and the matter proceeded to trial for purposes of determining damages....
The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident on July 2, 2010. Liability has been admitted. The matter proceeded to trial for the purpose of assessing damages....
In this personal injury action, the plaintiff seeks damages for injuries she sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on November 12, 2007. On that day the defendant, Donna Bucsis, backed into the plaintiffs vehicle in the parking lot of a recycling depot in Vernon, B.C. The defendant admits primary liability for the accident, but argues that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent....
This is an application by the defendant Stephen Payne to have the issue of liability severed from the other issues in this litigation. If successful on the severance application, he seeks to have the issue of liability resolved by way of summary trial....
THE COURT: This is an application brought by the defendant for an order compelling the plaintiff to attend for a functional capacity evaluation to be carried out over the course of two days on August 12 and 13, 2013....
The only issue in this trial is whether the plaintiff has proven that a motor vehicle accident that occurred on August 9, 2011, was caused by the defendants negligence....
The plaintiff, Janice Payne, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on February 12, 2010. Liability is admitted; at issue is the assessment of damages.The Accident...
On August 9, 2012, following a four-day trial, the trial judge declared that the appellants dog, Diesel, was a dangerous dog within the meaning of s. 49 of the Community Charter, S.B.C. 2003, c. 26. He also declared that he had no authority to make what has come to be known as a conditional order under that section. Finally, the court ordered that Diesel be humanely euthanized. Diesel is a mixed breed dog. His precise provenance is unknown, but he is predominantly German Sheppard crossed with Rottweiler. He weighed 95 pounds in the winter of 2010/2011....