The plaintiff was catastrophically injured in a motor vehicle accident and sued the defendants for damages.
The jury found the defendants 62% liable and awarded damages of approximately $2.6 million, including $2.2 million for future care costs.
The trial judge made a conditional assignment order of the plaintiff's future statutory accident benefits (SABs) to the defendants' insurers under section 267.8(12)(a)(ii) of the Insurance Act.
The plaintiff appealed, arguing that the assignment violated strict matching principles and was premature.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the conditional assignment order and rejecting the strict matching approach in favour of a "silo" approach.
The court also denied leave to appeal the trial judge's substantial reduction of the plaintiff's costs award, which was reduced from $795,616.09 to $375,000 due to the plaintiff's counsel's conduct regarding a settlement offer, the lack of material benefit in proceeding to trial, and conduct that unnecessarily extended the trial.