The appellant challenged a jury verdict in a motor vehicle personal injury action, arguing that the trial judge's charge inadequately corrected improper closing submissions on non-pecuniary damages and that the $200,000 award for pain and suffering was inordinately high.
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge expressly instructed the jury not to use a mathematical extrapolation approach and provided adequate guidance on assessing general damages.
Applying the deferential standard for appellate review of jury awards, the court found no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice and concluded the award was not so plainly unreasonable and unjust as to warrant intervention.
The appeal was dismissed with fixed costs to the respondents.
