The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of rejected claim of brain injury ( Jampolsky v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia,2015 BCCA 87). The young man from Surrey, BC suffered personal injury in four car accidents and after a four week trial was only awarded $15,000.00 ( read our review of the trial award: ICBC Statement reduces Award.).
In rejecting the appeal the Court of Appeal re-iterated a basic tenant in the law of evidence in British Columbia:

[40]  A trial judge is not bound to accept uncontradicted and cogent evidence, although it is incumbent on the judge to provide reasons for rejecting such evidence: see Savinkoff v. Seggewiss (1996), 25 B.C.L.R. (3d) 1 at paras. 17-21 (C.A.). In this case, the judge reviewed the evidence in detail and, when the reasons are read as a whole, the basis on which the plaintiff’s evidence was found not to be persuasive is clear.

The claimant  failed to establish that any of the car accidents caused brain injury. There was no reliable medical evidence  and no evidence that supported a causal link between the accidents and brain injury. The critical lay witness was the claimant’s  mother and the  judge found her to be a credible witness but not a reliable. The judge also  found that in his ICBC statement, and with the ICBC adjusters to whom he had spoken, he had not reported the symptoms one would expect from a person suffering a mild traumatic brain injury.
Posted by Vancouver Personal Injury Lawyer Mr. Renn A. Holness, B.A. LL.B.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment