08 Apr Hambrook v. Sandhu
In this matter the parties have each filed a notice of motion seeking a determination by the court as to liability to pay costs on a settlement agreement entered into between them....
In this matter the parties have each filed a notice of motion seeking a determination by the court as to liability to pay costs on a settlement agreement entered into between them....
THE COURT: This is an application by the third party, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, to have the plaintiff, Wanda Lee Green, attend a medical examination with Dr. Piper, an orthopaedic surgeon, on April 19, 2010, at 2:45 p.m. at Dr. Piper's office at 102 - 65 Richmond Street, New Westminster, British Columbia. The third party also seeks an order that the third party pay the plaintiff's reasonable travel expenses to attend the examination with Dr. Piper, and indeed, as will be seen, agreements have been reached in relation to this aspect of the motion and other issues as well. The third party also asks for the costs of the application....
The plaintiff, Hourash Falati, seeks damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on February 13, 2007. Liability is admitted. The most contentious issue in this claim is the extent of the plaintiffs alleged pre-trial and future losses of earnings and earning capacity. The plaintiffs position is that he lost or suffered diminished opportunities to earn income through various business ventures which he claims were delayed or frustrated by his injuries, including a new restaurant venture which he was about to get off the ground when the accident intervened.I. Background...
On March 10, 2010 an application was brought to adjourn the two‑week jury trial scheduled for March 15, 2010. This is a personal injury matter, arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on or about August 24, 2004 in Kelowna, B.C., where liability has been admitted and the only issue to be tried is the assessment of damages. Counsel requested the adjournment for these reasons: 1. Counsel for the plaintiff is not available for trial on March 15, 2010. Plaintiffs counsel says that the date was agreed to by Ms. Pitcher on condition that her new counsel be available, and when he filed an appearance plaintiffs counsel advised defence counsel that he was not available on this day. Defence counsel refused to adjourn the trial. 2. Plaintiffs counsel also indicated that the damages are connected to damages incurred in 2003, prior to the motor vehicle accident, when the plaintiff fell at the Vancouver airport. She has commenced an action (S68745) and that matter has recently been transferred to Vancouver for trial. 3. The plaintiff says she is unable to attend the trial on March 15, 2010 because her father‑in‑law passed away and the funeral is being held on March 11, 2010. Not only is she not in a position to conduct a trial, but her husband, who is her main support person, would not be available either....
This is an action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. In a judgment released on May 26, 2009, I awarded damages totalling $650,936.42. Of this amount, $280,000 was awarded for future loss of earning capacity and $160,700 for future care. My reasons for this award are indexed as 2009 BCSC 673....
In this trial, the plaintiff claims damages for injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident on January 5, 2006 (the MVA). She was 39 years old at the time of the MVA. She is now 43 years old. She suffered injuries to her neck, right shoulder, and back. She claims that those injuries have not resolved and that they continue to cause her pain and to restrict her activities....
Mr. Murphy Costello (Mr. Costello) was injured in a motor vehicle accident on October 26, 2006. Liability is admitted by the defendants. At issue is the quantum of damages owed with respect to the extent of Mr. Costellos injuries from the relatively minor rear-end collision. A complication is that the accident took place about three months after Mr. Costello had back surgery.I. Background...
The defendants apply for costs under R. 37B of the Rules of Court on the basis that they made a settlement offer that exceeded the award made to the plaintiff.BACKGROUND...
This is an application for costs arising out of an action for damages due to injuries suffered by the plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident. The trial lasted 15 days between June 1, 2009 and December 4, 2009. I issued judgment in favour of the plaintiff on December 15, 2009 in the amount of $31,034.64: Wittich v. Bob, 2009 BCSC 1721. The plaintiffs action against all defendants except for Mr. Wittich was dismissed....
On December 9, 2006, a car operated by the defendant struck the left rear corner of a car operated by the plaintiff. At the time of the collision, the plaintiff was stopped at a red light for eastbound traffic on Kingsway, at 14th Avenue, in Burnaby, BC. The defendant approached from behind and, in an attempt to pass on the left, caught the left rear of the plaintiffs vehicle with the right front of his vehicle. The impact was unexpected. It caused moderate damage to both cars....