The plaintiff must prove on a balance of probabilities that her injuries would not have occurred “but for” the accident: Athey v. Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458 at para. 24. The accident does not need to be the only cause of the plaintiff’s injuries but it must be a causal factor beyond the “de minimis” range: Athey at para. 15. I find that causation of damage is established. Notwithstanding my concerns about credibility and reliability, there was sufficient expert and third party corroboration to support a claim that the plaintiff was injured in the accidents. The only question is the proper quantum level.
The defendants accepted that the damages were indivisible, and that they did not seek any effort to apportion any head of damage as between the two accidents. I agree that the damage here was indivisible: Bradley v. Groves, 2010 BCCA 361 at para. 20.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.