March 12, 2012- This injury case was overturned by the BC Court of appeal and is no longer good law. See my personal injury article reviewing the Court of Appeal decision. In this Surrey personal injury lawsuit(Wahl v. Sidhu) the injury claimant was driving his employer’s 1988 Ford Pickup Truck which was loaded with two large tires…
This claim for emotional distress (Signorello v. Khan)began when the claimant drove his Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG Convertible, worth $210,094.36, to Vancouver Airport to leave on a business trip. As the court stated, “the car was in pristine condition with 21,000 km on the odometer when he turned it over to Gateway Valet Service, operated by…Imperial Parking Canada…
Personal injury lawyers representing bus driver’s injured in car accidents resulting in chronic illnesses celebrated a victory in this Court of Appeal case (Coast Mountain Bus Company Ltd. v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers of Canada (CAW-Canada), Local 111).
The initial step is for the applicant to satisfy the court that the application is not in the nature of a fishing expedition, and that document in question contains information which may relate to a matter in issue. As explained in the oft‑cited Compagnie Financiere et Commerciale du Pacifique v. Peruvian Guano Co. (1882), 11 Q.B.D. 55 (C.A.), a document relating to a matter in issue is one which directly or indirectly may enable the party to advance his own case or destroy that of his adversary or which may fairly lead him to a train of inquiry or disclose evidence which may have either of these consequences
Calling a car accident lawyer and calling ICBC dial-a-claim are two different steps so make sure you do both as early as possible. Your lawyer can report your injury to ICBC dial-a-claim for you if you hire the lawyer right away. Most top injury lawyers will agree to talk with you on the phone for a free consult. So, the two good reasons to report to ICBC dial-a-claim immediately are:
Many ICBC injury claimants have been denied disability benefits on the grounds that their injuries are not totally disabling. Often an injury claimant is physically able to do a task or job but is advised by a medical doctor not to engage in the activity.
In this car accident injury claim(Rosvold v. Dunlop) the British Columbia Court of Appeal confirmed that an injury victim’s optimism and willingness to embark on a new and untried line of endeavour does not prevent an award for loss of earning capacity. This injury case was relied upon in one of my recent case posts regarding claimants…
Despite the ICBC statement the judge concluded that the claimant probably blacked out or was rendered unconscious for a fraction of a second or mere seconds before finding himself straddling his bike or beside his bike. The judge went on to find that, ” that it is more likely than not that the plaintiff did suffer an extremely mild traumatic brain injury…
ICBC was found by Judge Voith to require what seems to be a battery of three medical experts to put themselves on equal footing to respond to this injury claim. The judge did not consider whether there existed exceptional circumstances.
Sometimes an injury claimant may be required by law to attend these medical exams if they are an insured with ICBC and are making a claim. The examination are often called “independent’ but many car accident lawyers would disagree. In