Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Torts - Negligence - Apportionment of liability - Contributory negligence - Damages - Compensatory damages - Future care costs - Appeal - Standard of review of jury verdict - What are the criteria to determine whether a jury award is perverse? - Is the standard required of a trial judge in his instructions to the jury met by general review of the evidence or must he connect the instructions with the precise theories being advanced by each of the parties?- Is the jury award with respect to future care costs excessive in that it exceeds, by a significant margin, every prior award for brain damage, with or without physical injury and even for quadriplegia? - Did the trial judge’s instruction to the jury with respect to future care costs meet a reasonable standard?

Bhupinder Singh Gill (“Gill”) was driving a delivery van for his employer Purba Furniture Ltd. (“Purba”), which Purba had leased from the Applicant. Gill and the Respondent Robert Marcoccia were involved in a car accident as they approached an intersection from opposite directions. As the Respondent approached the intersection, the traffic light turned amber. He initially slowed down, but then sped up over the speed limit to continue through the intersection. Gill had entered the intersection on the amber light, and was stopped in the left turning lane waiting to turn left. As the light turned red, he started to turn slowly into the intersection and did not notice the Respondent approach the intersection or run the red light. The Respondent’s car collided with the van Gill was driving, seriously injuring the Respondent. The Respondent brought an action in damages against Gill, Purba and the Applicant. Gill and Purba settled before trial, and the Applicant defended the action.