Blaming innocent victims for not calling expert witnesses sounds unfair. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia defends guilty drivers. The guilty drivers blame claimants for not paying doctors to testify at trial. Then they ask the court to draw an adverse inference. The current government changed the expert rules to help the state run auto…
In this case study, the small business owners suffered neck injuries and soft tissue injury in a car accident that occurred at the intersection of 57th Avenue and Angus Drive in Vancouver. The claimants’ vehicle was knocked to the curb being hit on the left front corner. The vehicle’s two front seat airbags deployed and ICBC deemed the vehicle…
The Judge agreed to instruct the jury, in this personal injury case, that they can draw an adverse inference from the claimant’s failure to have her treating psychiatrist provide an opinion.(Brar v. Ismail, 2018 BCSC 1487) The claimant’s depression was a central factor in this personal injury lawsuit. She claimed the car accident significantly aggravated her…
Even if an injury claimant wins at trial in an ICBC injury claim, defendant’s have a right of appeal. In this case even though the defendant lost at trial they alleged that the trial judge was wrong and should have blamed the claimant for her own injuries (failure to mitigate) and should have drawn an adverse…
Successful ICBC personal injury claims require expert medical opinions, especially in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. As we learn in today’s case review, not calling an important medical expert as a witness at trial can led the Court to infer that the evidence of the medical expert would not have assisted the claimant’s case (Espinoza…
No adverse inference was drawn by the judge after the claimant failed to have his family doctor testify at the personal injury trial. (Fabretti v. Gill,2014 BCSC 899). This ICBC injury case involved a car accident that occurred on the Pattullo Bridge in New Westminster. The claimant was only 12 years old at the time. He…