December 19, 2016
In reasons for judgment released earlier this year, the court in Scelsa v. Taylor, 2016 BCSC 1122 denied the plaintiff reimbursement of the $800.00 cost of an MRI. There was no dispute that the MRI was necessary, but the court held that the defendant should not pay the cost because “a publicly funded option was available” and the plaintiff had not demonstrated that the need for the MRI was “urgent”. The court said:
[237] The defendants have agreed to pay special damages of $6,002.60,
excluding only $800 claimed for a private MRI…The plaintiff failed to show an urgent need to obtain a private MRI when a publically funded option was available… Accordingly, the plaintiff is awarded special damages of $6,002.
The full text of the decision can be found here: http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc1122/2016bcsc1122.html?resultIndex=1
The McQuarrie Hunter Personal Injury Blog is maintained by the ICBC and personal injury practice group at McQuarrie Hunter LLP.
Dispute Resolution & Litigation
As of January 3, 2023, homebuyers in British Columbia can cancel a contract to purchase a residential property by serving written notice of the rescission on the seller w…
Read moreWhen a relationship ends, you may be faced with some difficult decisions around property division. It's commonly thought that family property is split 50/50 in divorce. H…
Read more
Divorce can be an extremely difficult and strenuous process to undergo for all parties involved. In the article below, our Family Law lawyers go over the 4 most common m…
Read more