In this action the plaintiff Angela Victoria Poulton sues for damages for injuries which she suffered in a motor vehicle accident on January 27, 2006. The defendant Brent Morris Inderbosch has admitted that he is solely responsible for the accident....
On March 15, 2010 I issued reasons awarding the plaintiff $412,198.53 for damages arising from personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident which occurred January 16, 2006....
This is an action for damages for personal injuries allegedly suffered by the plaintiff in two motor vehicle accidents, the first on January 31, 2006 and the second on February 2, 2007....
As in Spencer v. Popham, 2010 BCSC 683, released concurrently with this decision (Victoria 09-2313), Melanie Spencer commenced her action in Supreme Court but settled her claim for an amount within the Small Claims Courts jurisdiction. Nevertheless, is she entitled to costs in this Court? The test is whether there was sufficient reason for her to commence the claim in Supreme Court.Background...
Melanie Spencer commenced her action in Supreme Court but then settled her claim for an amount within the Small Claim Courts jurisdiction. Nevertheless, is she entitled to costs in this Court? Was there sufficient reason for her to commence the claim in Supreme Court?Background...
This ruling concerns the admissibility of certain documents found in Exhibit 13 that the plaintiffs seek to rely on in this trial. Exhibit 13 consists of six binders containing in excess of 400 individual documents. When the plaintiffs tendered Exhibit 13 as part of their case, by agreement of the parties it was admitted into evidence subject to the defendants right to challenge the admissibility of individual documents. The defendants now submit that a number of the documents contained in Exhibit 13 are inadmissible and seek their removal from the Exhibit.BACKGROUND...
THE COURT: The plaintiff seeks an order for an interim sale of the family home in West Kelowna on Country Pines Drive. She seeks this order prior to trial pursuant to Rule 43 of the Supreme Court Rules. Rule 43 gives the court discretion to order an interim sale of the matrimonial home where it is necessary or expedient to do so. The court has considered many factors in determining necessity and expedience, including the factors set out in the Continuing Legal Education of B.C. Family Law Source Book at page 844. I am going to summarize some of those:(a) whether a sale is apt to promote an early settlement;(b) where a sale is apt to defeat a spouses claim for reapportionment;(c) whether the sale is inevitable;(d) whether the sale would put a spouse and children on the street pending resolution of the litigation;(e) whether there is alterative accommodations available; and(f) whether the proceeds would fall entirely to creditors....
THE COURT: The plaintiff Insurance Corporation of British Columbia seeks damages in respect of insurance claims made by the defendant Todd Mechalchuk, on the basis that such claims were fraudulent. His wife, Tarrah Mechalchuk, is also sued as a party who aided her husband....
This is an action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. It is brought under Rule 68. The plaintiff alleges the defendants were at fault and that she suffered injuries as a result....
This is an application by the defendants seeking an order for costs against the plaintiff....