2 total
Case allowed decision
The plaintiff was injured in a multi-car collision.
The defendants admitted liability, and the case proceeded to a jury for damages.
This ruling addresses a threshold motion brought by the plaintiff to determine if her claim for general damages is barred by s. 267.5(5) of the Insurance Act, which requires a "permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental or psychological function." The court applied the three-part test from Meyer v. Bright and found that the plaintiff's impairments to her ability to work and attend school were permanent, important, and serious, thus meeting the statutory threshold.
The court dismissed the defendant's threshold motion, finding the plaintiff's chronic pain constituted a permanent serious impairment.
The defendant brought a threshold motion seeking a declaration that the plaintiff's personal injury claim for non-pecuniary loss was barred under s. 267.5(5) of the Insurance Act, arguing her injuries did not meet the "permanent serious impairment" threshold.
The jury had previously awarded $40,000 for general damages but no future loss of income.
The court, preferring the plaintiff's medical expert, found the plaintiff suffered from chronic pain disorder caused by the accident, constituting a permanent impairment.
While the plaintiff did not meet the employment-related impairment criteria due to successful accommodation and increased income, the court found her usual activities of daily living were seriously and permanently impaired, affecting her household management, social life, and psychological well-being.
The motion was dismissed, affirming the plaintiff met the statutory threshold.
