This matter relates to a motor vehicle accident which took place on December 27, 2005.  The Plaintiff was rear-ended and her vehicle suffered $10,000 in damage.  The Plaintiff claimed to have suffered soft tissue injuries to her neck and back, as well as a right knee injury. 

The defence argued that the Plaintiff had not proved her right knee injury was related to the accident.  The Plaintiff was successful in proving that her knee injury was related to the accident as her doctor's medical evidence was preferred to that of the Defendant's doctor. 

The appeal of this matter related to a determination of liability at trial.  The trial decision resulted in the defendant being found 80% liable for the motor vehicle accident in question. 

The details of the accident are that the Plaintiff was driving up a hill between 12 and 22 km/hour over the speed limit.  The Defendant was turning left on a yellow light in front of the path of the Plaintiff.  The Plaintiff did not slow down upon seeing the light at the intersection turn yellow. 

This appeal related to a decision of the trial judge which allowed the Plaintiff's claim for a slip and fall.  Mr. Fingerhut fell while crossing a speed bump in a shopping centre parking lot.  He fell when he tripped over a gap between the speed bumps which he did not see.  The court found that this gap between the speed bumps created a trap and that it fell below the required standard of care necessary in the circumstances. 

The court refused to find that the Plaintiff was contributorily negligent for his actions. 

The Plaintiff in this case was involved in a motor vehicle accident on December 7, 2004.  He was rear-ended by the Defendant.  Liability was not at issue in the proceedings.  The Plaintiff was still suffering neck pain at the time of the trial.  The judge described the Plaintiff's neck pain as being chronic.  

These matters relate to the assessment of liability for a motor vehicle accident. 

Ms. Fisher was driving her vehicle in Vernon when a collision ensued with a vehicle being driven by Mr. Carol.  Ms. Fisher was driving on a through street with the right of way.  Mr. Carol left a stop sign to cross the through street Ms. Fisher was travelling on when the collision occurred.  Mr. Carol argued that because Ms. Fisher was speeding, there should be a finding of 35-40% liability against her.