BC court sets woman’s non-pecuniary damages at $0 for two accidents

For an injured plaintiff who had been involved in motor vehicle accidents in 2001, 2004, 2006, 2012, 2015, and 2019, the British Columbia Supreme Court awarded her total damages of $18,150 for the 2012 and 2015 accidents. 

Before the BC Supreme Court, the plaintiff brought the first action claiming damages for her injuries from the 2004 and 2006 accidents. In Tsalamandris v MacDonald, 2011 BCSC 1138, Justice Griffin issued trial reasons awarding the plaintiff the following damages for those two accidents: 

• $740,000 for loss of future earning capacity 
• $135,050 for future care costs 
• $100,000 in non-pecuniary damages 
• $44,013 in special damages 
• $8,000 for an in-trust claim for childcare services provided by the plaintiff’s mother 

Justice Griffin determined that the plaintiff's injuries from the 2001 accident, among other factors, made her a “thin-skull victim” relating to the 2004 and 2006 accidents. 

In Tsalamandris v McLeod, 2012 BCCA 239, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia reduced future care costs by $13,497, thus awarding $121,553 for this head of damages. 

Claim of damages for 2012 and 2015 accidents

Before the BC Supreme Court, the plaintiff commenced another action seeking damages for her injuries from the 2012 and 2015 accidents. She claimed total damages of over $1.2 million.

During the trial, some evidence addressed the 2011 trial reasons. The jury learned that the court had awarded the plaintiff damages in 2011, but did not hear about the amounts awarded. 

Jury verdict

The jury assessed total damages at $110,000, comprising: 

• $55,000 in non-pecuniary damages 
• $42,000 for future care costs 
• $13,000 in special damages 

The jury imposed the following deductions: 

• 45 percent for the plaintiff’s failure to act reasonably to reduce her damages 
• 40 percent for the damages attributable to the 2019 accident 

In the present proceeding, the plaintiff applied to set aside the jury verdict. 

Damages award of $18,150

In Tsalamandris v Monterrosa, 2026 BCSC 1801, the BC Supreme Court denied the plaintiff’s applications to set aside the jury verdict. 

Thus, as requested by the defendants, the court ordered the entry of the judgment according to the jury verdict, subject to deductions for non-pecuniary damages awarded to the plaintiff in the 2011 trial decision. 

Upon considering the rule against double recovery and other relevant principles and authorities, the court agreed to deduct the non-pecuniary damages awarded in the first action from the jury’s non-pecuniary damages award in this case. 

After considering the relevant deductions, the court awarded the plaintiff total damages of $18,150, broken down as follows: 

• $0 for non-pecuniary damages 
• $13,860 for future care costs 
• $4,290 in special damages 

Inconsistency with 2011 trial reasons

The BC Supreme Court acknowledged a factual inconsistency between the assessment of non-pecuniary damages by Justice Griffin and the assessment by the jury in this case. 

However, the court found no authority for the assertion that there would be a legal error in an award of non-pecuniary damages simply due to its factual inconsistency with a different factual trier’s award issued over 14 years ago. 

The court noted that the jury members, who were not told about the amount of Justice Griffin’s non-pecuniary damages award, formed their own views about an appropriate award based on the evidence presented. 

Treatment of 2019 accident

The BC Supreme Court then tackled the plaintiff’s position that there should be no deduction for injuries arising from the 2019 accident. The court saw no basis to set aside the jury verdict, given that the plaintiff was attempting to relitigate a point already determined during trial. 

Mitigation of damages

Next, the BC Supreme Court addressed the plaintiff’s argument that the jury had no evidence to reasonably determine that the plaintiff did not mitigate her damages.

The court found the jury entitled to decide the extent to which the plaintiff’s failure to follow the recommended treatment impacted her recovery. The court added that the jury, not the trial judge, should answer this question. 

Cost award

Subject to other potential cost considerations, the BC Supreme Court ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendants the costs of the action at scale B. 

More BC Supreme Court cases on motor vehicle accidents

Here are some of the Supreme Court of British Columbia’s other recent decisions involving injury claims arising from vehicular accidents. 

In a case arising from a motor vehicle accident in Richmond, BC, on Feb. 1, 2017, the court issued a Sept. 16 decision awarding total damages of $1,023,400.33 after accounting for the injured plaintiff’s lack of mitigation. 

In a case rooted in a motor vehicle accident, the court made a May 29 ruling awarding total damages of $879,458 to an airport screening officer who developed a disabling chronic pain condition due to her back and leg injuries. 

Enjoy this story? Read the latest personal injury news on the main page!