The plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Defence medical experts opined that the plaintiff’s significant pain in his shoulder, neck, and chest continuing eight years post-accident was unlikely to improve. The plaintiff called no medical evidence at trial. The jury assessed the plaintiff’s damages for non-pecuniary loss at $45,000. Justice MacLeod noted that pain is subjective and what is disabling for one person may not be for another. Impairment must be assessed on a case by case basis with focus on the effect of the injury on the individual plaintiff and not the seriousness of the injury itself. The plaintiff’s evidence supported that he is able to go about most of his usual activities of daily living, albeit with pain for some activities. Justice MacLeod found that the plaintiff’s evidence supported some degree of ongoing impairment; however it did not support a finding that the impairment interfered with “most” of the activities of daily living. As such, the plaintiff did not meet the statutory threshold.
