Reasons for judgement were released last week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, assessing damages for modest soft tissue injuries caused by a Low Velocity Impact.
In last week’s case (Naidu v. Gill) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2008 rear-end collision. The crash resulted in little vehicle damage. The Plaintiff alleged he had injuries caused by the crash which were on-going at the time of trial. The court found that the plaintiff was an “unreliable historian” and did not accept that the Plaintiff’s ongoing complaints were related to the crash. The Court did, however, accept that the crash caused a modest soft tissue injury which resolved 4 months following the collision. In doing so Mr. Justice Kelleher provided the following reasons:
 Mr. Naidu suffered soft tissue injuries in the 2008 motor vehicle accident. The injuries were not severe. It is significant that no prescription medication was suggested or prescribed; Mr. Naidu has been able to work throughout the period since then. No report of an injury was made to ICBC for over a year. Mr. Naidu was able to travel to Asia on three occasions in 2010. Mr. Naidu made three visits to a physician in early 2009 and made no mention of pain symptoms from the accident. Finally, while the extent of the damage to the vehicle is not determinative for the reasons I just explained, it is not irrelevant that the damage to the vehicle was minor.
 The evidence does not establish causation for the symptoms persisting past approximately January 2009. It is at least equally likely that the symptoms which resulted in his complaints in April 2009 and September 2009 were caused by physically demanding work as a security guard…
 I conclude that the symptoms from the September 2008 accident persisted into early 2009. The plaintiff has not discharged the onus of proving that his symptoms since that time were caused by the accident. I have reviewed a number of authorities including Bagasbas v. Atwal, 2009 BCSC 512; Gradek v. Daimler Chrysler Financial Services Canada Inc., 2009 BCSC 1572; Ostovic v. Foggin, 2009 BCSC 58; and Ceraldi v. Duthie, 2008 BCSC 1812.
 An award of $4,000 is appropriate.