K. Book

The plaintiff sued the municipality for negligence after tripping and falling in a pothole on a residential road.

The parties agreed on damages of $100,000, leaving liability as the sole issue.

The court applied the four-step test for municipal non-repair under the Municipal Act.

The action was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to provide reliable evidence of the pothole's dimensions, thereby failing to prove that the road was in a state of non-repair that posed an unreasonable risk of harm.

The court noted that had liability been found, the plaintiff would have been 15 percent contributorily negligent for failing to pay reasonable attention to the roadway surface.

Joshua West, a plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident case, sought substantial indemnity costs following a jury verdict awarding him $710,000 in damages.

The defendant, Robin West, opposed the amount and sought costs against the co-plaintiff, Robert West, whose claim was dismissed at trial.

The court, applying factors under Section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, reduced Joshua West's requested fees, finding that two senior counsel were not required and substantial indemnity applied only from the date of his Rule 49 offer.

The court also allocated a portion of preparation time to Robert West's dismissed claim.

Ultimately, Joshua West was awarded $225,000 in fees plus $67,554.49 in net disbursements, while Robert West was ordered to pay the defendant $10,000 in costs.

No costs were awarded for a mixed-result motion regarding calling Robin West as a witness.

The plaintiff suffered a severe traumatic brain injury in a motor vehicle accident.

Following a jury trial that apportioned liability between the defendants, this trial assessed the plaintiffs' damages.

The court awarded the primary plaintiff $275,000 in general damages, finding he sustained permanent cognitive and behavioural impairments but achieved moderate functional independence through extensive rehabilitation.

The court also awarded significant damages for future loss of income, future medical and rehabilitation expenses, and attendant care, while deducting collateral benefits received.

Additional awards were made for a 5% management fee and Family Law Act claims for the plaintiff's mother, sister, and daughters, including compensation for the sister's extensive caregiver services.

The plaintiffs brought a motion at the start of trial to strike the jury notice served by the defendant, arguing the issues surrounding the plaintiff's severe brain injury were too complex for a jury.

The defendant opposed the motion or alternatively sought bifurcation.

The court found the scientific evidence and damages calculations related to the brain injury were unduly complex and better suited for a judge alone.

However, the court determined the liability issues were straightforward enough for a jury.

The motion was allowed in part, and the trial was bifurcated with liability to be tried by a jury and damages by a judge alone.