The respondent suffered severe back injuries in a motor vehicle accident caused by the appellant.
Medical experts recommended surgery with a 70% chance of success, but the respondent refused due to a fear of surgery, demanding a 100% guarantee.
The trial judge found the refusal unreasonable and cut off damages for loss of income at the date the respondent would have recovered had he undergone surgery.
The Court of Appeal adjusted the award by factoring in the 30% chance of failure.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the objective test of reasonableness applies unless the plaintiff has a pre-existing psychological condition rendering them incapable of making a rational choice.
The Court affirmed that damages should be assessed by discounting full compensation by the probability of the surgery's success.
