The plaintiff commenced an action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. During the plaintiff’s examination in chief, his counsel sought to examine him concerning two litigation loans he took out following the subject accident, and to introduce into evidence the two loan agreements and discharge statements. The plaintiff argued that interest on the loans (and perhaps even the principle) is, or should be recoverable damages; therefore, evidence concerning the loans was admissible. The defendants objected. Justice Trimble held that the evidence was not admissible. He reasoned that the litigation loan-related expenses were too remote and not reasonably foreseeable to the defendants. Therefore, they could not be advanced as damages in the action and evidence relating to them was not relevant and not admissible.
Menu