Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Liability and damages arose from a rear-end motor vehicle collision involving a taxi and a pickup truck.

• The Court found the defendant fully liable, rejecting contributory negligence for the plaintiff’s lack of seatbelt use.

• Plaintiff proved she suffered a mild traumatic brain injury with lasting cognitive, psychological, and physical symptoms.

• Total damages of $3.7 million were awarded, covering lost income, future earning capacity, and medical care.

• A later ruling denied the defendants' attempt to deduct over $1.3 million in insurance benefits from the award.

• The Court affirmed the plaintiff’s entitlement to BC benefits after Ontario benefits were exhausted, with no double recovery.

Facts and outcome of the case

The accident and legal claim

Chantal Courchesne was injured on October 29, 2017, while a passenger in a taxi on her way to the Vancouver airport. The taxi was rear-ended by a pickup truck driven by Tsz Chau and owned by 1110486 BC Ltd. GM Financial Canada Leasing Ltd. was also named as a defendant due to its connection to the ownership or lease of the pickup. At the time of the accident, Courchesne was the CEO of the Canadian Dermatology Association and resided in Ontario.

Courchesne brought a civil suit in British Columbia against all three defendants, seeking damages for the physical, cognitive, and psychological injuries she suffered as a result of the collision. Both liability and quantum of damages were contested.

Liability ruling and plaintiff’s condition

The 2023 decision (2023 BCSC 1969) held that Chau was 100% liable for the collision. The Court rejected his claim that the taxi had cut him off, instead accepting the evidence that the taxi was stopped at a red light when Chau failed to stop in time. The Court also found there was no contributory negligence on Courchesne’s part for not wearing a seatbelt, as the evidence did not establish that her injuries would have been lessened if she had worn one.

The Court found Courchesne had suffered a mild traumatic brain injury with ongoing symptoms, including headaches, nausea, dizziness, memory issues, speech difficulties, fatigue, and depression. These symptoms led to her inability to continue working and a permanent disruption to her career path. Although some surveillance video showed her engaging in normal daily activities, the Court accepted that her functionality was meaningfully impaired over time.

Damages awarded in 2023

Justice Chan awarded Courchesne the following:

• Non-pecuniary damages: $200,000

• Past income loss: $520,000

• Loss of future earning capacity: $2,900,000

• Cost of future care: $106,410

• Special damages: $19,987.05

This resulted in a total damages award of $3,746,397.05.

Post-trial ruling on insurance deductions (2025 BCSC 1479)

In 2025, the defendants applied to have roughly $1.3 million deducted from the damages based on insurance benefits allegedly payable under Ontario’s Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). They claimed the plaintiff should have been entitled to additional income replacement benefits and catastrophic impairment benefits under the Ontario scheme.

However, the Court ruled against them. It found Courchesne had received all she was entitled to under the Ontario scheme and was not eligible for further benefits, including income replacement (because she continued working beyond the 104-week window) or catastrophic impairment (as she had been denied the designation and chose not to appeal).

The Court emphasized that uncertainty about whether insurance benefits would be paid must be resolved in favour of the plaintiff. Additionally, the Court confirmed that Courchesne, as an Ontario resident, was entitled to claim BC’s Part 7 benefits once her Ontario benefits were exhausted. Because the defendants could not prove that further Ontario benefits were payable, no deductions were allowed from the damages award.

Conclusion

The two rulings are fully aligned in favour of Courchesne. The 2023 decision awarded nearly $3.75 million based on significant ongoing injuries and loss of earning capacity. The 2025 decision upheld the integrity of that award, finding no grounds for deduction based on overlapping insurance coverage. The rulings confirm that Courchesne remains the successful party, both in establishing liability and defending the value of her full damages award.