December 15, 2016
In the recent decision of Norris v. Burgess, 2016 BCSC 1451, the court awarded $155,340.86 in special costs against ICBC as punishment for late disclosure of video surveillance, in circumstances where the court had previously ordered that all video surveillance be disclosed. The court said:
 ICBC is a public insurance company and an agent of our provincial government. It is a sophisticated litigant which assumes conduct of trials on behalf of many insureds in our province.
 …The Court finds that ICBC showed a casual disregard for the October 20, 2015 Court Order; an order designed to ensure that the scheduled jury trial was heard without surprises or ambush.
 The reputation of the court was also affected. Especially with a jury trial, a reasonable member of the public would have questioned the efficient workings of the trial and, more generally, the efficient administration of justice. He or she would question the significance and respect ICBC gives a court order designed to avoid surprise and trial unfairness.
 In sum, ICBC’s casual disregard for the disclosure rules, especially when reinforced by the October 20, 2015 Court Order, warrants rebuke in the form of an award of special costs.
The full text of the decision can be found here: http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc1451/2016bcsc1451.html?resultIndex=1
The McQuarrie Hunter Personal Injury Blog is maintained by the ICBC and personal injury practice group at McQuarrie Hunter LLP.
Can a Mortgage Secure Funds that Have Been Previously Advanced to a Borrower?
Share: In a typical mortgage scenario, a lender advances funds to a borrower at the time…Read more