Multiple Vehicle Accident Caused by 90 Year Old Driver: Mr. Van Sprang is a man in his 30’s with a young family and was a key person in his dad’s business which was a heating and cooling service company.  Mr. Van Sprang’s father had plans to hand over the business to his son when he reached his retirement age.  The work was physical and also required ingenuity and problem solving skills.  Mr. Van Sprang was the “muscle” of the company, doing the heavier tasks and the more physical tasks such as working within tight crawl spaces and attics.  Unfortunately, Mr. Van Sprang was involved in an accident whereby the defendant Mr. Tweed, failed to yield as he entered onto the Trans-Canada Highway at an intersection.  His actions forced a commercial truck driver to move over in his lane which in turn caused Mr. Van Sprang’s vehicle to spin out of control and end up on its roof at the shoulder of the road.  Mr. Van Sprang suffered soft tissue injuries which limited his ability to be as productive as he used to be, and also limited his ability to continue on in his role with the company.  ICBC denied liability for this accident, even though it seemed obvious that the actions of Mr. Tweed set in motion this serious accident.  This matter went to trial for eight days.  During that time ICBC strenuously argued that Mr. Van Sprang was at fault for the accident as he must have been driving too fast for the road conditions, and that it had nothing to do with the Defendant failing to yield.

The trial judge rejected this theory, and instead found that Mr. Tweed was indeed at fault for the accident.  The trial judge awarded close to $270,000.00 to Mr. Van Sprang.  This award reasonably assessed his damages for pain and suffering and loss of earning capacity.  It also vastly exceeded any attempts by ICBC to resolve the matter.  The trial was conducted by James Cotter and Allyson Edwards.

PDF: Van_Sprang_v._Tweed_-_Reasons_for_Judgement.PDF

Three Motor Vehicle Accidents Contribute to Chronic Pain: Susan A-C was referred to Nixon Wenger by a friend.  James represented her initially for an accident that occurred in 2012.  While representing her, Susan was unfortunately involved in two other accidents, none of which were her fault.  Susan suffered chronic soft tissue injuries which affected her ability to move and function without pain and to suffer from intense migraines.  ICBC defended the claim of Susan for all three accidents.  They defended a claim in part on the basis that Susan’s claim of pain, migraines and disability far exceeded the injuries she could have suffered in any of these accidents, as none of the accidents were of such a nature as to cause such injury.  In other words, ICBC was saying that the accidents were of such a minimal nature that no one could be so disabled from any of the accidents.  Susan was unable to return to her job as a Walmart employee.  She had difficulty maintaining her home as she did prior to the accidents, and had a difficult time cooking and looking after her children.  James Cotter and Ryan Irving took this matter to a two-week trial in October of 2019.  They retained the foremost chronic pain specialist in British Columbia to assess Susan and to provide expert opinion evidence.  In addition, an occupational therapist was retained, an economist, and a doctor of physical and medicine rehabilitation.  ICBC retained its own experts.  This was a hotly contested trial with many arguments relating to evidentiary issues and expert evidence issues.  However, at the end of the day the trial judge agreed with our position that the culmination of these accidents resulted in significant disability for Susan.  She was awarded over $700,000.00 in damages.  This was a far greater sum than ICBC had ever offered her in the seven years since her first accident in 2012.  Susan was very pleased with the outcome and felt that it justly reflected her loss.