Acquaint yourself with McQuarrie’s recent work through our latest articles, podcasts, and knowledge videos.
In reasons for judgment released December 22, 2016, the court in Kim v. Lin, 2016 BCSC 2405 criticized the evidence of the defence Orthopedic Surgeon Dr. Grypma, calling …
Read more
In reasons for judgment released December 22, 2016, the court in Gaebel v. Lipka, 2016 BCSC 2391, dismissed the plaintiff’s claim in circumstances where the plaintiff was…
Read more
In reasons for judgment released this morning, the court in Varga v. Kondola, 2016 BCSC 2406, was presented with the problem of determining liability for a rear-end colli…
Read more
In what may be one of the largest awards to date in BC for loss of housekeeping capacity, the court in Kim v. Lin, 2016 BCSC 2405 awarded a 36 year-old plaintiff $418,000…
Read more
In reasons for judgment released this morning, the BC Court of Appeal in Reimer v. Bischoff, 2017 BCCA 4, overturned a trial judge’s $34,000 award for future cost of Boto…
Read more
In reasons for judgment released this morning, the BC Court of Appeal in Benavides v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2017 BCCA 15, dismissed an appeal by Tran…
Read more
There is increasing awareness about the toll mental illness and mental injuries have in our society. However, those injured in motor vehicle accident still struggle when …
Read more
In reasons for judgment published this week, the court in Robinson v. 1390709 Alberta Ltd., 2016 BCSC 2459, found the defendant liable in a slip and fall case. The defen…
Read more
In reasons for judgment released today, the court in Domil v. Cheung, 2017 BCSC 65, awarded $175,000 in non-pecuniary damages to a plaintiff diagnosed with “Somatic Sympt…
Read moreIn reasons for judgment released December 22, 2016, the court in Kim v. Lin, 2016 BCSC 2405 criticized the evidence of the defence Orthopedic Surgeon Dr. Grypma, calling his testimony “disingenuous” and describing his report as “either deliberately misleading or grossly careless”. Mr. Justice Sewell wrote:
[11] With the exception of Dr. Grypma, I found all of the witnesses who testified or provided reports to be credible and reliable witnesses. Unless I specifically indicate otherwise, I accept their evidence.
[117] There is a fundamental disagreement between Dr. Krassioukov and Dr. Grypma over the cause of Ms. Kim’s complaints. Dr. Krassioukov’s opinion is that the SI joint deterioration noted on the CT scan and MRI is the result of trauma suffered in the Accident. Dr. Grypma is of the opinion that the SI deterioration is minor and is the result of a pre-existing condition unrelated to the Accident.
[118] I prefer Dr. Krassioukov’s opinion on this issue to that of Dr. Grypma. I appreciate that Dr. Grypma is an orthopedic surgeon, and as such his opinion would ordinarily be accorded considerable weight. However, after reviewing his opinions in the context of the whole of the evidence and observing him under cross-examination, I have concluded that he failed to present balanced and impartial evidence in this case.
[123] … I find that Dr. Grypma was being disingenuous when he suggested that Dr. Budzianowska-Kwiatkowski’s report was ambiguous and that he was being either deliberately misleading or grossly careless in his reports when he used this passage to suggest that Ms. Kim had recovered from her injuries by October 2008.
[127] For all of the foregoing reasons, I can give no weight to Dr. Grypma’s opinions.
The full text of the decision can be found here: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/16/24/2016BCSC2405.htm
