Robert B. Ledgley

The appellants appealed a trial judge's costs disposition.

Prior to trial, the appellants offered to settle the case for $85,100.

The parties later agreed on damages of $125,000, and the trial proceeded only on liability, resulting in a finding against the respondents.

The trial judge held that the agreement on damages invalidated the prior offer to settle and awarded partial indemnity costs.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the offer to settle was not withdrawn and Rule 49.10 applied, entitling the appellants to substantial indemnity costs from the date of the offer.

The court remitted the quantum of costs to the trial judge and upheld the refusal to award a risk premium.

The appellant husband was seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident, rendering him unable to continue providing caregiving services to his wife, who suffered from a pre-existing medical condition.

The husband elected to receive income replacement benefits rather than caregiver benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The wife brought a derivative claim under s. 61 of the Family Law Act for the cost of hiring a substitute caregiver.

The Court of Appeal held that the substitute caregiver expenses were not 'health care' expenses under the Insurance Act, meaning the defendants were not protected from liability.

Furthermore, the court held that the wife's claim was her own statutory cause of action and was not barred by her husband's election of benefits.