A B.C. Supreme Court Judge has awarded $1,475,169.17 to the owner of View Royal Dental Clinic in Victoria for life-altering, career-impacting injuries he sustained after a rear-end crash.
On March 31, 2018, Dr. Cameron Harris was a passenger in a vehicle rear-ended by another vehicle owned and driven by defendant Vida Anderson-Wulff. He and his girlfriend at the time were stopped at a red light at the intersection of Bay and Douglas streets when he "looked to his left, heard a crunch, and felt a sudden impact," the decision by Justice Edlyn Laurie read. The reasons for judgment were announced on Jan. 21 in Vancouver.
Harris, in his second year of dentistry at UBC at the time of the accident, sought damages in the range of $1.6 to $2.9M which included loss of past and future earning capacity, loss of housekeeping capacity, cost of future care and special damages.
One of the most career-altering symptoms Harris experienced from the accident was numbness in his dominant left hand, predominantly in the third and fourth fingers, that he said continued to affect his career at the time of the trial.
"Dr. Harris can use a dental drill continuously for 10 to 15 minutes before the onset of pain and discomfort," Laurie said when summarizing the impact of symptoms on his dentistry practice.
Among other symptoms, including "limited range of motion in his neck", Dr. Harris "also experiences discomfort from sitting for long periods while performing dentistry."
To manage these issues, Harris stated he had to structure his working day to give himself needed breaks, resulting in an estimated loss of one to three hours of dental billing hours each day.
Since the accident, Harris estimated he had seen a massage therapist about 50 to 60 times, a chiropractor about 100 times, and a physiotherapist about 150 times.
"I find that that the plaintiff has proven on a balance of probabilities that, but for the defendant鈥檚 negligence, he would not have sustained the injuries and conditions discussed in Dr. Mehdiratta鈥檚 report, and he would not have experienced his post-accident symptoms," Laurie said.
Harris' credibility was generally accepted, though Laurie pointed out there were some inconsistencies, particularly regarding his income loss claims, which he clarified at trial.
The defendant's challenge to his credibility based on discrepancies in his statements to a physiotherapist 鈥� including that he did not report having headaches to his physiotherapist for more than two years 鈥� was rejected as there was insufficient context and the defendant failed to confront him with this evidence at trial.
"I do not suggest that Dr. Harris was a perfect witness. At times during his evidence, especially in cross-examination, I found him to be defensive," Laurie said. "Overall, despite these frailties, I generally find the plaintiff鈥檚 evidence to be credible and reliable."
