Lastly, the defence contends that in providing compensation for future care costs, the court should take into account that, absent the accident, the plaintiff would sooner or later have had difficulties with his left knee and/or a knee replacement that would necessitate a degree of cost of care approaching that currently recommended in the reports. The plaintiff’s pre-existing knee pain was severe enough to require the plaintiff to use a cane from time to time. Further, well before the end of his expected life, the plaintiff would likely have required a significant level of care with the possibility of surgery necessary to address his pre-existing knee condition: see Sharpe v. Koomson, 2019 BCSC 558 at para. 362.
"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.