The appellants appealed a jury's damages award, arguing it was plainly unreasonable and unjust.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the $250,000 general damages award, while generous, was supported by evidence of the devastating impact the injuries had on the respondent's life, including his inability to work, bankruptcy, and marriage breakdown.
The court also upheld the future loss of income award and found no error in the trial judge's decision not to instruct the jury on the cap on general damages.
