July 2014 In a recent Supreme Court decision Paul G. Kent was successful in having ICBC pay his client’s court costs, at double the usual rates awarded to a successful party. In J.D v. Chandra 2014 BCSC 1272 ICBC ignored the Plaintiff’s Offer to Settle served on ICBC the weekend before the start of the trial. At the end of trial we were successful in obtaining a judgment in favour of our client that was 2 ½ times greater than our Formal Offer to ICBC and 4 times what ICBC had offered. As a result of this win and ICBC’s unreasonableness in not accepting the Plaintiff’s formal Offer to Settle the Court said:
In conclusion, I consider that the offer to settle made by the plaintiff in this case is one that ought to be taken into account in awarding costs. The defendants had time to consider the offer in the context of the exchange of offers that preceded it. The defendants knew that the plaintiff was not likely to be in a financial circumstance that allowed her to take the risk of losing at trial but that ICBC could afford the risk of trial, and they chose to take this risk. It is likely that the defendants also would be able to predict the plaintiff’s extreme reluctance to go to trial due to her concerns as to how it might affect her future career but it is not necessary to make any finding in that regard.
Considering all the circumstances, I consider it appropriate to award the plaintiff double costs for the trial and regular costs prior to trial.
The Court also rejected ICBC’s argument that there was divided success at trial and denied ICBC any award of costs. To read the entirety of the Court’s decision on ICBC’s costs loss click here: https://canlii.ca/t/g80k6
Experience counts. Contact P.G. Kent today regarding your ICBC claim.