16 Nov Plaintiff Stabbed by Co-worker in Workplace Fight Awarded Damages

In the case of Johal v. Mangat, 2020 BCSC 1148, the Plaintiff and Defendant both worked as longshoremen. During a shift change, the two men argued and then fought.  During the fight the Defendant stabbed the Plaintiff with a knife.

The Plaintiff claimed damages against the Defendant for assault and battery.  The Plaintiff said the Defendant brought a knife to a fist fight and that the stabbing was an excessive use of force.  The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff was the aggressor in the fight and so his use of a knife was reasonable.

Assault and battery are different civil wrongs, although the terms are often used together.  Assault is the intentional creation of the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact. Battery is any non-trivial direct physical contact.

At trial the judge concluded that the Defendant, upset at rumours he thought were being circulated by the Plaintiff, decided to confront the Plaintiff about them.  Given that he had armed himself with a knife, he did formulate his plan in advance and the regular shift change provided an opportunity for that confrontation. However, the evidence did not allow the judge to conclude that the Defendant planned in advance to use the knife.

There was much debate about who started the fight and who the aggressor was.  The judge concluded that the Defendant confronted the Plaintiff in a provocative manner.  The Plaintiff responded angrily, an argument ensued and the argument became physical.

The judge was satisfied that the Defendant was liable to the Plaintiff for assault. He brandished the knife in the middle of the fight and by doing that he intentionally created in the Plaintiff the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact.

The judge was also satisfied that the Defendant was liable to the Plaintiff for battery.  By the Defendant’s own admission, he stabbed the Plaintiff intentionally.  The judge rejected the argument that the Plaintiff consented to the Defendant’s use of a knife.  At most, the Plaintiff consented to a fist fight but did not consent to the risk of being stabbed or to the use of a knife during the fight. Even if the Defendant’s use of the knife was self-defence, the potentially lethal use of force was well out of proportion to the level of force he faced, and to the occasion generally.

The court awarded the Plaintiff $80,000 in non-pecuniary damages for his physical wounds and post-incident PTSD.

The judge held that punitive damages were also warranted in this case, in order to denounce and punish the Defendant’s reprehensible conduct. Taking into account that the Defendant had faced criminal proceedings and a peace bond already, the judge awarded the Plaintiff $4,000 for punitive damages.