What is the test for determining the seriousness of misconduct by a litigant in a personal injury case?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Kent v. Martin, 2011 ABQB 163 (CanLII):
The judgment in Jackson v. Trimac clearly recognizes that the qualitative seriousness of a misconduct by a litigant must be scrutinized in deciding the issue of costs.
"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.
Other Questions
Is there a plaintiff in a personal injury case who pleads a certain amount in damages and then amend that prayer as and when the extent of the injuries is learned? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the case law on fiduciary obligations of an individual in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining a proper award in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for “case splitting” in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
How has the trial judge determined the individual share of family expenses in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
How has the court interpreted the definition of a personal injury policy in the context of personal injury claims? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the proper direction to the jury in a personal injury case when determining the value of an annuity? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for setting aside a discretionary decision in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
What are the relevant considerations to a judge when deciding whether or not to order trial by jury in a personal injury case? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a person charged with a serious criminal offence that is serious and complex be granted legal aid at the expense of the state? (Alberta, Canada)
