10 Mar Inconsistent Evidence at Trial
If your testimony at trial is not consistent with the medical or employment evidence, the Court may not rely on your testimony when making its decision.
In Ben-Yosef v. Dasanjh, 2016 BCSC 360, the Plaintiff was struck in a crosswalk by a vehicle turning left at low speed. The Plaintiff fell onto his right side but immediately stood up, continued on to do some shopping and then walked home. He attended a walk-in clinic the next day and saw his family doctor a few weeks after the incident. He described the incident as a being “bumped” by a vehicle.
The Plaintiff had been in another accident more than ten years before. He did not return to work following that first accident and applied for CPP.
In assessing the Plaintiff’s credibility and reliability at trial, the Court had concerns. For example, some of his statements were inconsistent with the medical evidence:
- The Plaintiff denied having high blood pressure before he was struck in the crosswalk. However, the medical evidence showed he was taking high blood pressure medication prior to this;
- The Plaintiff alleged that the incident aggravated his pre-accident sinus condition. The medical evidence did not support a link;
- The Plaintiff claimed housekeeping expenses but he never discussed housekeeping limitations with his doctors. Therefore, there was no medical evidence to support his inability to do housework; and
- The Plaintiff testified that he withdrew his CPP application. The evidence showed that he was denied CPP.
Based on these inconsistencies, the Court did not give much weight to the Plaintiff’s description of post-accident changes, unless it was corroborated by the testimony of a witness other than his wife and son. Overall, the Court found that most of the Plaintiff’s symptoms were present before the accident.
The Court awarded pain and suffering damages of $30,000, based on an aggravation of his pre-existing chronic pain condition. The Court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for future treatment expenses and housekeeping costs because there was no supporting medical evidence.
This case highlights how the Court deals with testimony inconsistent with medical evidence. At Acheson Sweeney Foley Sahota, we work hard to ensure that your claims are supported by the best medical evidence available. Call us if you have been injured.