Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers warn a brain injury must be properly diagnosed, assessed and treated to try to help the victim recover as fully as possible. In many cases full recovery is not attainable and in those cases very large ICBC accident claim settlement awards are required to do justice.
Our Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers are adept and experienced at handling MTBI Brian injury claims resulting from a car accident. Call us to set up a free appointment at any of our 4 offices including our West Kelowna office by calling 1-877-602-9900.
Our Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers want to educate the driving public about ways to prevent a brain injury and what to do if you suffer a Kelowna or West Kelowna MTBI brain injury.
As all.org’s excellent summary states our Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers know no brain injury is minor or should be ignored or minimized by an ICBC adjustor or defence lawyer:
Vehicle crashes are another common cause of traumatic brain injury. You can reduce your risk by keeping your vehicle in good repair, following the rules of the road, and buckling your seat belt.
Doctors classify traumatic brain injury as mild, moderate or severe, depending on whether the injury causes unconsciousness, how long unconsciousness lasts and the severity of symptoms. Although most traumatic brain injuries are classified as mild because they’re not life-threatening, even a mild traumatic brain injury can have serious and long-lasting effects.
If a Head Injury Occurs
If you or someone you’re with experiences an impact to the head and develops any symptoms of traumatic brain injury, seek medical advice even if symptoms seem mild. Call emergency services for anyone who is unconscious for more than a minute or two or who experiences seizures, repeated vomiting or symptoms that seem to worsen as time passes. Also seek emergency care for anyone whose head was injured during ejection from a vehicle, who was struck by a vehicle while on foot, or who fell from a height of more than 3 feet. Even if you don’t lose consciousness and your symptoms clear up quickly, a brain injury still may have occurred.
Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers
Lorne N. MacLean, QC founder of the Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury Lawyers team summarizes the law on pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life in a Kelowna ICBC MTBI Brain Injury case of Nahal v. Ram where the court reviewed the law and awarded $100,000.
 The plaintiff clearly suffered soft-tissue injuries to his neck and back which have, for the most part, now healed. He also suffered headaches regularly following the accident which he testifies now occur only weekly.  I also find on a balance of probabilities that the plaintiff did suffer a mild traumatic brain injury as a result of his head having hit the windshield of the vehicle in which he was a passenger at the time of the accident. It is most likely that what occurred is that the very significant impact of the vehicle with the tree deployed the air bag but the impact of Mr. Nahal being vaulted forward resulted in Mr. Nahal’s head striking the windshield. This vaulting forward was not only in response to the impact of the vehicle with the tree but from the weight and force of his friend, David, being thrown forward into the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s seat, which was clearly broken in the accident  The defence submits that the plaintiff has failed to mitigate his losses in that he has infrequently sought medical assistance, persevered only through two months and seven sessions of physiotherapy and did not actively pursue rehabilitation. There may be some delayed recovery caused as a result but if so, the failure to mitigate has resulted in only a minimal difference in his condition which cannot be calculated. The major injuries suffered by the plaintiff are cognitive and flowing from his mild traumatic brain injury which has resulted in some depression and a lack of confidence. Those injuries are not likely to abate. Also, there is no medical evidence that further physiotherapy would have helped the plaintiff towards recovery.(See Gregory v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2011 BCCA 144 at paras. 53 and 56)  In assessing non-pecuniary damages I have in mind the factors often referred to from the Court of Appeal decision in Stapley v. Hejslet, 2006 BCCA 34 at para. 46, in which the Court of Appeal was referring to the case of Boyd v. Harris, (2004), 237 D.L.R. (4th) 193, 2004 BCCA 146. These factors are:
 Keeping those factors in mind, the plaintiff submits that an award of $200,000 is appropriate under this head of damages. The defence, on the other hand, submits non-pecuniary damages in the range of $35,000 to $45,000 are appropriate.  Considering all of the circumstances, including the injuries of Mr. Nahal and their impact on his lifestyle and future, I award non-pecuniary damages of $100,000.
- a) age of the plaintiff;
- b) nature of the injury;
- c) severity and duration of pain;
- d) disability;
- e) emotional suffering. . . .
- f) loss or impairment of life. . . .
- g) impairment of family, marital and social relationships;
- h) impairment of physical and mental abilities;
- i) loss of lifestyle; and
- j) the plaintiff’s stoicism (as a factor that should not, generally speaking, penalize the plaintiff. . . .).