When suing for damages for harm caused by others a Court needs to be satisfied that the allgations fueling the lawsuit took place. In the case of opposing versions of events if a Court can not pick one over the other the claim will be dismissed. Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, with such an outcome.
In this week’s case (Fergusson v. Eyrl) the Plaintiff alleged “that he was sexually assaulted on numerous occasions” by the Defendant. The Defendant denied the allegations in their entirety. Ultimately the Court concluded that both parties versions of events were plausible and given that one could not be preferred over the other the claim was dismissed. In dismissing the claim Mr. Justice Melnick provided the following reasons:
 In sum, there is compelling evidence to suggest both that the assaults alleged occurred and that they did not. But, at its best, the case of Mr. Fergusson is evenly balanced with that of Mr. Eyrl. I am not satisfied that it is more probable than not that the claims of Mr. Fergusson against Mr. Eyrl have been made out.