The Watt v. Meier decision was released by the British Columbia Supreme Court on September 1, 2006.

On June 29, 1999, Katharine Watt, age 24, was jogging across an intersection in Vancouver when she was struck by a corporate-owned vehicle. Ms. Watt suffered a mild traumatic brain injury and soft tissue injuries to her neck, right arm and shoulder, and knee. She sued both the driver of the vehicle and the corporation for personal injury damages.

Before trial, the parties agreed that the car accident was partly caused by the negligence of Ms. Watt and that she was 25% at fault for the car accident while the defendants were 75% at fault. However, the defendants disputed the severity, duration and consequences of the injuries she suffered. They argued that Ms. Watt had largely recovered to her pre-accident state. Read the rest of this entry »

The court considered the principles governing medical malpractice liability set out by the Supreme Court of Canada. They are:

• That the conduct of a doctor must be compared against the conduct of a prudent and diligent doctor placed in similar circumstances.
• In assessing that conduct, courts should be careful not to rely on the perfect vision afforded by hindsight.
• Medical professionals should not be held liable for mere errors of judgment, which are distinguishable from professional fault.

The court found that by not ordering the urgent CT scan on July 8th, Dr. Crosby failed to exercise the degree of care expected of her, given the plaintiff’s clinical presentation and laboratory results. Read the rest of this entry »

The Smith v. Liwanpo decision was released by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on April 23, 2007.

On April 4, 2002, Larry Smith, age 61, had x-rays taken of his large intestines which disclosed two colonic polyps (abnormal growth of tissue on the colon). A colonoscopy was recommended for further assessment.

Mr. Smith underwent a colonoscopy on July 4, 2002. Following the colonoscopy he was sore in the lower back area and in the rectal area. The pain was severe enough for him to attend at the emergency department of Tillsonburg Hospital on Sunday July 7th.

Mr. Smith was admitted to the hospital and was examined the next morning by Dr. Crosby, the on-call surgeon. Dr. Crosby completed a physical examination, took a history and reviewed the plaintiff’s chart, lab work and x-ray reports and an x-ray for the next morning. On the morning of Tuesday, July 9th, Dr. Crosby received the x-ray results and ordered a CT scan.

Read the rest of this entry »

The following blog post was created by Toronto disability lawyer Mark Yazdani. Visit Mark’s disability law information website: www.DisabledLaw.ca.

The court commented that Manulife had good reason to seriously question whether Ms. Milner was disabled. For example, it had surveillance which showed Ms. Milner moving in an apparently relaxed and. normal way as she walked, stood and sat in various situations as well as driving her car, carrying parcels from her car to her house, sewing and so on. All of these activities appeared to contradict the severe subjective symptoms Ms. Milner had reported to her doctors.

The court also pointed to the fact that Ms. Milner, since becoming ill, had written and defended a thesis for her master’s degree in nursing. Manulife argued that the capacity of someone to write such a document was evidence that Ms. Milner had work capacity. However, the court found that Ms. Milner had obtained substantial assistance from friends to complete her thesis. Read the rest of this entry »

This blog post was created by Ontario disability lawyer Mark Yazdani. For further information, visit the disability law information site: www.disabledlaw.ca.

The Milner v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Company court case was released by the B.C. Supreme Court on November 28, 2005.

In September 2001, Cindy Milner, age 45, was hired as a manager at a residential care facility for the elderly. She was responsible for managing nurses, care aids and related staff and ensuring that the facility had all the necessary supplies. In late October, she contracted pneumonia and was off work for one week. When she returned to work, Ms. Milner described having strange headaches, being unbelievably tired, and being forgetful and “foggy”. She left her job for good three weeks later from a multitude of symptoms later diagnosed as chronic fatigue syndrome.

Before developing chronic fatigue syndrome, Ms. Milner stated she had a physically active lifestyle with sporadic involvement in a number of sports such as cycling, swimming, cross-country skiing, wind surfing, scuba diving and ice skating. Read the rest of this entry »

The Cerilli v. Ottawa decision was released by the Ontario Superior Court on December 5, 2006.

Assunta Cerilli, a 42-year old self-employed hairdresser, left her shop to walk to the bank. It was the morning of January 25, 2002 in Ottawa, and a little over five centimetres of snow had accumulated over the previous four days. The sidewalk on Preston Street was covered with snow and there were also patches of ice. As she was walking, she suddenly slipped and fell on the sidewalk and fractured her left ankle. Read the rest of this entry »

Mr. Kralik’s lawyer argued that the fact there was snow and ice on the chairlift seat was negligence on the part of Mt. Seymour. However, the court found that the snow and ice was minimal and did not affect the safe operation of the chairlift. Mr. Kralik was cleaning the seat for his comfort only. The seats had been adequately cleaned by the staff in the morning, and Mr. Kralik’s accident was not caused because he had to clean the seat in order to ride it safely. Thus, the court found there was no negligent conduct on the part of Mt. Seymour with respect to the condition of the chairs on the lift.

However, the court ruled that the failure of the chairlift operator to notice there was a problem and stop the chair constituted negligence. The chairlift operator was paying attention to a group of little children who were about to board behind Mr. Kralik and did not pay attention to Mr. Kralik. Read the rest of this entry »

The Kralik v. Mt. Seymour Resorts Ltd. court case was released by the B.C. Supreme Court on February 26, 2007.

On March 16, 2003, Peter Kralik and his 16-year-old son decided to spend the day skiing together at Mount Seymour.

Mr. Kralik and his son lined up to take the chairlift for their last run just before lunch. When they entered the loading ramp, Mr. Kralik saw that the seat on the chairlift had become wet with ice and snow and he tried to brush it off. He was having trouble chipping the ice off the chair when he suddenly realized that he was right at the edge of the loading ramp and had no time to sit down on the moving chair lift. Read the rest of this entry »

At trial, Mr. Romanicki admitted that he was responsible for the accident, but his lawyer argued that Ms. Dionne was 15% at fault for failing to look both ways before crossing the intersection. However, the court ruled that Ms. Dionne was already mid-way across the intersection when she was struck by Mr. Romanicki’s vehicle. As a result, she was not at fault for failing to see Mr. Romanick’s vehicle.

Also, the law in Canada is that once a pedestrian has safely entered a crosswalk, he or she may assume that the motorists will yield the right-of-way. The pedestrian will not be at fault unless he or she commits a negligent act such as running across the intersection or gesturing such that the motorists is misled into thinking they may proceed safely. Read the rest of this entry »