ICBC Law

Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court awarding a Plaintiff close to $90,000 in damages as a result of a 2005 collision.

The Plaintiff was 25 at the time of the BC car crash.  He was not at fault for the crash and the trial focussed exclusively on the issue of damages.

The court heard from a variety of experts.  The court also viewed surveillance footage of the Plaintiff playing hockey and doing other physical activities.  Such surveillance footage often comes to light at the trial of ICBC claims, particularly those inovlving on-going soft tissue injuries.

In awarding $40,000 for non-pecuniary damages (pain and suffering) the court made the following findings:

[15] I am persuaded by the evidence to conclude on the balance of probabilities that (the Plaintiff) suffered a flexion extension injury to the soft tissues of his neck, back and shoulder.  Considering the persistent difficulty that he has had with his lower back, the injury is fairly described as moderate in nature.  (the Plaintiff) had back trouble related to his rugby injury and on occasion his extremely heavy work load prior to his injury for which he sought treatment, but I accept his evidence that his previous back problems were intermittent and less severe before the accident.  (the Plaintiff) had already given up rugby and snowboarding prior to his injury.  His ability to play in-line hockey demonstrates that he does not have a functional disability, his problem is that demanding activities can cause the onset of significant pain.

[16] I accept Dr. Travlos’ opinion that:

He will likely still experience intermittent pain flare ups, but should be capable of reasonable physical activity.  He will learn to avoid certain recreational activities and certain types of work activities in order to manage his pains and by doing so should have reasonable pain control.

As I have noted earlier, (the Plaintiff) had pain in his back prior to the collision and would have had it in the future if the collision had not occurred, but his motor vehicle injuries have increased his susceptibility to back pain and made that back pain worse when it occurs.  I assess (the Plaintiff’s) claim for general damages for pain and suffering which has been and will be caused by his motor vehicle injuries above and beyond that which he would have had had he not been so injured at $40,000.

Tags: back injury cases, bc personal injury lawyer, ICBC claims, icbc claims lawyer, neck injury cases, soft tissue injuries, soft tissue injury cases

This entry was posted on Monday, September 29th, 2008 at 12:16 pm and is filed under ICBC Back Injury (soft tissue) Cases, ICBC Shoulder Injury Cases, ICBC Soft Tissue Injury Cases, ICBC Whiplash Cases, Uncategorized. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.