9:15 - 11:50 C Block Legal Studies
12:30 - 3:05 B Block Human Geography
C Block Legal Studies - We'll start in the class this morning, however I'll remind you that you have the option of completing a 30 second commercial for your law firm much like
Or real life ones like this...
I'll explain the benefits of an out of court settlement and identify why negotiating an agreement is better than going to court. For any civil case to proceed you need a “cause for action” (Negligence, Intentional Tort, Strict Liability) = a civil wrong. Who is responsible for the “cause for action” = Defendant and who the damage was done to = Plaintiff. Responsibility is determined on a “balance of probabilities” (more probable than not) and more than one person can be responsible = “liable”. The people involved in a lawsuit are called “litigants” and you may NOT sue someone under the age of majority (that means under the age of 19). You may sue a “next friend” of a minor (parents). The burden of proof is on the Plaintiff in civil cases.
- Filing a claim – the first step is making a “Statement of Claim” (full name and address of plaintiff and defendant, the remedy being sought, and a brief explanation of the reason for the claim).
- Claim is delivered to Defendant “Claim Served”. The Defendant has 10 – 30 days to respond…
- The Defendant then can file a “Statement of Defence” (a legal doc that outlines the reason you disagree with the Plaintiff’s claim) – goes to Plaintiff and to court. The Defendant can “counterclaim” (stating that the Plaintiff is actually liable for damages). The Defendant can make a “third party claim” (another person who is partially or wholly liable). If Defendant doesn’t respond the court may issue a “default judgement” (the Plaintiff gets everything they asked for)
After, we'll look over information about damages. Here is some info to help:
Compensatory Damages - The basis: Compensation in tort law is based on the principle of restitutio in integrum. The Purpose: To restore the Plaintiff, in so far as money can do, to the same position as if no tort had been committed. It entitles Plaintiff to be compensated for their pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses arising from the Defendant’s tort.
Compensatory Damages - The basis: Compensation in tort law is based on the principle of restitutio in integrum. The Purpose: To restore the Plaintiff, in so far as money can do, to the same position as if no tort had been committed. It entitles Plaintiff to be compensated for their pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses arising from the Defendant’s tort.
Compensatory damages are divided into Special and General damages. Special Damages include: Pre-trial pecuniary losses incurred by Plaintiff which includes lost income, nursing and personal attendant costs, medical expenses and consequential expenses. General Damages include: Future losses resulting from Defendant’s tort. A Plaintiff may be compensated for three heads of damages under general damages: (1) Inability to work; (2) future care cost; and (3) non-pecuniary losses. Each item of damage must be separately considered and compensated for.
This section is adapted from:
The History and Treatment of Damages in Canada
Patricia J. Armstrong
Lindsay LLP
Damages in British Columbia Tort Claims: What You Need to Know
Preszler Law Firm
General Damages - (3) Non-Pecuniary Loss
In contrast to the relative ease with which pecuniary damages can be determined, non-pecuniary damages compensate for those consequences of an injury that, although real, are not so easily quantified. These types of damages tend to relate to a person’s subjective experience of an injury, which, of course, are not accompanied by an invoice or receipt. In Canada, the factors which are analyzed to determine an appropriate award are: 1) the plaintiff’s age, 2) the nature of the injury, 3) the severity and duration of the pain, 4) the level of the disability, and 5) the loss of lifestyle or impairment of life (Stapley v. Hejslet, 2006 BCCA 34 at para. 46).
Perhaps the best-known type of non-pecuniary damages are damages for pain and suffering, which seek to compensate an injured person for having to experience pain as the result of the injury.
Other types of non-pecuniary damages include: Disfigurement; Loss of expectation of life; and Loss of amenities of life.
In fixing the amount of such damages in British Columbia, courts consider past awards in similar cases, considering the type of injury, age of the injured person, and other relevant circumstances (see above).
Limits on Non-Pecuniary Damages in British Columbia
When many people think of “pain and suffering” damages, they think of the extremely high damage awards often made in the United States. But here in Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada has long imposed an upper limit on pain and suffering and other non-pecuniary damages.
In the late 1970s, the Supreme Court of Canada decided a trilogy of cases in which it established a cap on non-pecuniary damages. On January 19, 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada tackled this issue head-on by ruling on a trilogy of cases to limit the maximum amount of non-pecuniary damages a plaintiff could receive in a civil action (Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229 (SCC) [Andrews]; Thornton v. School District No. 57 (Prince George) et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 267 (SCC) [Thornton]; and Arnold v. Teno, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 287 (SCC) [Arnold]) (the “Trilogy”). As the Court explained (emphasis added):
Note, however, that this upper limit is only available in the worst of injury cases. For example, in two of the cases in which the Court first developed that limit, the plaintiffs were young adults who had become paralyzed from the neck down. In the average B.C. tort claim, plaintiffs should anticipate an award of non-pecuniary damages well below the cap. Non-pecuniary damages were meant to provide a substitute for loss of amenities and to make the plaintiff’s life more bearable. Damages may be awarded in other headings to provide equality in the amount of compensation a plaintiff receives in a negligence case.
In D.S. v. Quesnelle (2019) ONSC, the Ontario Superior Court held that the cap on general damages of $100,000 set by the "trilogy" Supreme Court of Canada cases did not apply to intentional torts.
Non-Compensatory Damages include: Punitive Damages which are appropriate where the Defendant’s misconduct was so malicious, oppressive and highhanded. Their Purpose? Punishment and deterrence. Nominal Damages are small amounts of money awarded when the plaintiff has successfully established a cause of action but has suffered no substantial loss or is unable to prove what that loss is. Their purpose? Vindication of the Plaintiff’s rights and a minor deterrence to the Defendant.
This section is adapted from:
The History and Treatment of Damages in Canada
Patricia J. Armstrong
Lindsay LLP
Generally, punitive damages are imposed in rare circumstances where there has been high-handed, malicious, arbitrary or highly reprehensible misconduct that departs markedly from ordinary standards of decent behaviour. Their purpose is not to compensate the plaintiff, but to give the defendant his or her just dessert (retribution), to deter the defendant and others from similar misconduct in the future (deterrence), and to mark the community’s collective condemnation (denunciation) of what has happened. Currently, the range for punitive damages in Canada is between $50,000 to $1 million. Most cases, however, fall within the $100,000 to $200,000 range (see Clarfield v. Crown Life (2000), 23 C.C.L.I. (3rd) 266 (Ont. S.C.J.), Kogan v. Chubb (2001), 27 C.C.L.I. (3rd) 16 (Ont. S.C.J.), Fidler v. Sunlife, 2004 BCCA 273, Fernandes v. Penncorp Life Insurance Company, 2013 ONSC 1637).
In Canada, aggravated damages are awarded to compensate a party for the mental distress experienced from another party’s misconduct or misbehaviour. Aggravated damages cover intangible injuries such as mental distress, pain, anguish, grief, anxiety, vexation, humiliation, indignation, outrage, wounded pride, damaged self-confidence or self esteem, loss of faith in friends or colleagues, and other similar matters. As no Supreme Court of Canada case has ruled on aggravated damages in bad faith claims, the damages are specific to the provinces and vary in range. In provinces such as British Columbia, the highest award has only been $35,000 (Asselstine v. Manulife, 2005 BCCA 292). On the other hand, a recent 2013 Ontario case awarded $100,000 in aggravated damages on a disability insurance claim (Fernandes v. Penncorp Life Insurance Company, 2013 ONSC 1637). Currently, the typical range for aggravated damages in Canada is $10,000 to $100,000 but most of the awards fall on the lower end of the spectrum.
As the numbers currently stand in Canada, the upper limit for non-pecuniary damages is approximately $360,000. The range for aggravated damages is between $10,000 and $100,000, and the range for punitive damages is between $50,000 and $1 million.
The History and Treatment of Damages in Canada
Patricia J. Armstrong
Lindsay LLP
Damages in British Columbia Tort Claims: What You Need to Know
Preszler Law Firm
General Damages - (3) Non-Pecuniary Loss
In contrast to the relative ease with which pecuniary damages can be determined, non-pecuniary damages compensate for those consequences of an injury that, although real, are not so easily quantified. These types of damages tend to relate to a person’s subjective experience of an injury, which, of course, are not accompanied by an invoice or receipt. In Canada, the factors which are analyzed to determine an appropriate award are: 1) the plaintiff’s age, 2) the nature of the injury, 3) the severity and duration of the pain, 4) the level of the disability, and 5) the loss of lifestyle or impairment of life (Stapley v. Hejslet, 2006 BCCA 34 at para. 46).
Perhaps the best-known type of non-pecuniary damages are damages for pain and suffering, which seek to compensate an injured person for having to experience pain as the result of the injury.
Other types of non-pecuniary damages include: Disfigurement; Loss of expectation of life; and Loss of amenities of life.
In fixing the amount of such damages in British Columbia, courts consider past awards in similar cases, considering the type of injury, age of the injured person, and other relevant circumstances (see above).
Limits on Non-Pecuniary Damages in British Columbia
When many people think of “pain and suffering” damages, they think of the extremely high damage awards often made in the United States. But here in Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada has long imposed an upper limit on pain and suffering and other non-pecuniary damages.
In the late 1970s, the Supreme Court of Canada decided a trilogy of cases in which it established a cap on non-pecuniary damages. On January 19, 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada tackled this issue head-on by ruling on a trilogy of cases to limit the maximum amount of non-pecuniary damages a plaintiff could receive in a civil action (Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229 (SCC) [Andrews]; Thornton v. School District No. 57 (Prince George) et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 267 (SCC) [Thornton]; and Arnold v. Teno, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 287 (SCC) [Arnold]) (the “Trilogy”). As the Court explained (emphasis added):
[T]he problem here is qualitatively different from that of pecuniary losses. There is no medium of exchange for happiness. There is no market for expectation of life. The monetary evaluation of non-pecuniary losses is a philosophical and policy exercise more than a legal or logical one.Justice Dickson for the Supreme Court of Canada imposed a conservative upper limit on non-pecuniary damages:
I would adopt as the appropriate award in the case of a young adult quadriplegic like Andrews the amount of [CDN]$100,000. Save in exceptional circumstances, this should be regarded as an upper limit of non-pecuniary loss in cases of this nature (Andrews at p. 21).As a result, the Court established $100,000 as the cap on non-pecuniary damages. However, it later clarified that that amount was subject to inflation. In the 1981 Supreme Court of Canada decision of Lindal v. Lindal ([1981] S.C.J. No. 108 (SCC), it was agreed upon that the $100,000 cap would be adjusted at the rate of inflation to determine the upper limit at the time of trial. Today, the cap is a bit more than $360,000.
Note, however, that this upper limit is only available in the worst of injury cases. For example, in two of the cases in which the Court first developed that limit, the plaintiffs were young adults who had become paralyzed from the neck down. In the average B.C. tort claim, plaintiffs should anticipate an award of non-pecuniary damages well below the cap. Non-pecuniary damages were meant to provide a substitute for loss of amenities and to make the plaintiff’s life more bearable. Damages may be awarded in other headings to provide equality in the amount of compensation a plaintiff receives in a negligence case.
In D.S. v. Quesnelle (2019) ONSC, the Ontario Superior Court held that the cap on general damages of $100,000 set by the "trilogy" Supreme Court of Canada cases did not apply to intentional torts.
Non-Compensatory Damages include: Punitive Damages which are appropriate where the Defendant’s misconduct was so malicious, oppressive and highhanded. Their Purpose? Punishment and deterrence. Nominal Damages are small amounts of money awarded when the plaintiff has successfully established a cause of action but has suffered no substantial loss or is unable to prove what that loss is. Their purpose? Vindication of the Plaintiff’s rights and a minor deterrence to the Defendant.
This section is adapted from:
The History and Treatment of Damages in Canada
Patricia J. Armstrong
Lindsay LLP
Generally, punitive damages are imposed in rare circumstances where there has been high-handed, malicious, arbitrary or highly reprehensible misconduct that departs markedly from ordinary standards of decent behaviour. Their purpose is not to compensate the plaintiff, but to give the defendant his or her just dessert (retribution), to deter the defendant and others from similar misconduct in the future (deterrence), and to mark the community’s collective condemnation (denunciation) of what has happened. Currently, the range for punitive damages in Canada is between $50,000 to $1 million. Most cases, however, fall within the $100,000 to $200,000 range (see Clarfield v. Crown Life (2000), 23 C.C.L.I. (3rd) 266 (Ont. S.C.J.), Kogan v. Chubb (2001), 27 C.C.L.I. (3rd) 16 (Ont. S.C.J.), Fidler v. Sunlife, 2004 BCCA 273, Fernandes v. Penncorp Life Insurance Company, 2013 ONSC 1637).
In Canada, aggravated damages are awarded to compensate a party for the mental distress experienced from another party’s misconduct or misbehaviour. Aggravated damages cover intangible injuries such as mental distress, pain, anguish, grief, anxiety, vexation, humiliation, indignation, outrage, wounded pride, damaged self-confidence or self esteem, loss of faith in friends or colleagues, and other similar matters. As no Supreme Court of Canada case has ruled on aggravated damages in bad faith claims, the damages are specific to the provinces and vary in range. In provinces such as British Columbia, the highest award has only been $35,000 (Asselstine v. Manulife, 2005 BCCA 292). On the other hand, a recent 2013 Ontario case awarded $100,000 in aggravated damages on a disability insurance claim (Fernandes v. Penncorp Life Insurance Company, 2013 ONSC 1637). Currently, the typical range for aggravated damages in Canada is $10,000 to $100,000 but most of the awards fall on the lower end of the spectrum.
As the numbers currently stand in Canada, the upper limit for non-pecuniary damages is approximately $360,000. The range for aggravated damages is between $10,000 and $100,000, and the range for punitive damages is between $50,000 and $1 million.
We'll head to the learning commons after to continue work on our civil litigation assignment
B Block Human Geography - Today we are back in the library for your last day to work on your information graphic poster on an endangered language. Remember, for your endangered language you’ll need to:
What can your poster look like? Here are some stock vector examples for layout ideas
See me if you need help or assistance. This project is due next Wednesday - email me your digital infoposter.
- Show where the endangered language originated and diffused to (yes on a map).
- Show the connection to the family, branch, and group of the endangered language. (Use your best judgment on this).
- Show where the language is spoken today, indicate how many people speak it.
- Show Unique features of this endangered language (What makes it different to and similar than others?)
- Show examples of how the language is written and or spoken
- Show why your endangered language is important to save
- Show how your endangered language is both being threatened (contributing factors) and being saved
- Show how people can find more info (links...sources cited)
And then you could use this Spanish language infoposter as a guide as well
No comments:
Post a Comment