Beam v. Pittman et al., (1997) 147 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 166 (NFCA)

• Judge: Gushue, C.J.N., Mahoney and Cameron, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Newfoundland)
• Case Date: January 15, 1997
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1997), 147 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 166 (NFCA)

Beam v. Pittman (1997), 147 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 166 (NFCA);

    459 A.P.R. 166

MLB headnote and full text

Lorraine Pittman (first appellant/first cross-respondent) and Alvin Pittman (second appellant/second cross-respondent) v. Maura Beam (first respondent/cross-appellant), Frederick Mercer (second respondent/third cross-respondent), Parker Enterprises Limited (third respondent/fourth cross-respondent) and Katherine Waterman (fourth respondent/fifth cross-respondent)

(1994 No. 184)

Frederick Mercer (first appellant) and Parker Enterprises Limited (second appellant) v. Maura Beam (first respondent), Lorraine Pittman (second respondent), Alvin Pittman (third respondent) and Katherine Waterman (fourth respondent)

(1994 No. 197)

Indexed As: Beam v. Pittman et al.

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Court of Appeal

Gushue, C.J.N., Mahoney and Cameron, JJ.A.

January 15, 1997.

Summary:

The plaintiff suffered injuries in three separate rear-end collisions, for which she brought three separate negligence actions. The actions were heard together. Liability was admitted by all defendants. The plaintiff sought an assessment of damages and ap­portionment of the loss between the defen­dants.

The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, in a judgment reported 122 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 379 A.P.R. 181, assessed damages and apportioned liability 40% to the first accident, 20% to the second, and 40% to the third, including future pecuniary losses. The defendants in the first action (Pittmans) appealed the apportionment of liability and the nonpecuniary general dam­age award. The plaintiff cross-appealed the damage award for loss of future house­keeping capacity, challenging the trial judge's decision to limit recovery to age 60 rather than the plaintiff's remaining life expectancy.

The Newfoundland Court of Appeal dis­missed the appeals and the cross-appeal.

Damage Awards - Topic 150

Injury and death - Multiple injuries - A 49 year old nurse suffered injuries in three separate rear-end collisions which event­ually left her permanently partially dis­abled - A low back, neck and right shoul­der injury were aggravated by the second accident, as were her headaches and dizzi­ness - The third accident aggravated her shoulder and lower back pain, but the neck pain and headaches continued with the same intensity - The cumulative effect of the accidents resulted in fibromyalgia: widespread aching and tender points in specific parts of the body and disturbed sleep, with its onset after the third accident - Able to work only part-time in a non­clinical, sedentary position, but not up until age 65 - The trial judge awarded $80,000 general damages for nonpecuniary loss, including an undisclosed amount for pretrial loss of housekeeping capacity - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal held that although the award was higher than it would have awarded, the court would not interfere where the trial judge's award was not wholly erroneous - See paragraphs 30 to 45.

Damage Awards - Topic 495

Injury and death - General damage awards - Loss of housekeeping capacity - The trial judge awarded a partially disabled 49 year old female plaintiff $2,400 per year general damages for future loss of house­keeping capacity until age 60 - The plain­tiff claimed that the award should have been calculated for the remainder of her life expectancy - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not err in limiting damages to age 60 - See paragraphs 46 to 50.

Torts - Topic 7382

Joint and concurrent tortfeasors - Contri­bution between tortfeasors - Apportion­ment of fault - The plaintiff suffered injuries in three separate accidents, which cumulatively disabled her from working full time - A low back, neck and right shoulder injury, headaches and dizziness were aggravated by the second accident - The third accident aggravated her shoulder and lower back pain, but the neck pain and headaches continued with the same inten­sity - The cumulative effect of the acci­dents resulted in fibromyalgia - The trial judge held that the percentage of disability most probably resulting from each accident should be determined and liability appor­tioned on the basis of those percentages - The trial judge apportioned liability 40% to the first accident, 20% to the second, and 40% to the third, including future pecuniary losses - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal held that, where the cum­ulat­ive effect of all three accidents had the effect of rendering the plaintiff unable to work full-time, the trial judge did not err in using the percentage method rather than the thin skull method in Long v. Thiessen - See paragraphs 13 to 29.

Cases Noticed:

Dobbin v. Alexander Enterprises Ltd. and Alexander (1987), 63 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 194 A.P.R. 1 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Bourque v. Wells (1991), 118 N.B.R.(2d) 394; 296 A.P.R. 394; 82 D.L.R.(4th) 574 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1992), 138 N.R. 408; 127 N.B.R.(2d) 449; 319 A.P.R. 449; 87 D.L.R.(4th) vii (S.C.C.), appld. [para. 15].

Long v. Thiessen (1968), 65 W.W.R.(N.S.) 577 (B.C.C.A.), not appld. [para. 15].

Baker v. Willoughby, [1969] 3 All E.R. 1528 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 16].

Jobling v. Associated Dairies Ltd., [1982] A.C. 794 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 16].

Pryor v. Bains (1986), 69 B.C.L.R. 395 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

Seyfert v. Butler, [1993] B.C.J. No. 1905 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 18].

Vorvis v. Insurance Corp. of British Col­umbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1085; 94 N.R. 321; [1989] 4 W.W.R. 218; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 193; 36 B.C.L.R.(2d) 273; 90 C.L.L.C. 14,035; 25 C.C.E.L. 81, refd to. [para. 20].

Athey v. Leonati et al. (1996), 203 N.R. 36; 81 B.C.A.C. 243; 132 W.A.C. 243 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 23].

Corey v. Gilbert, [1965] S.C.R. 457, refd to. [para. 26].

Stein Estate v. Ship Kathy K, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802; 6 N.R. 359; 62 D.L.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 29].

Pax Management Ltd. et al. v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 998; 141 N.R. 324; 15 B.C.A.C. 81; 27 W.A.C. 81; [1992] 6 W.W.R. 289; 95 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 71 B.C.L.R.(2d) 164; 6 B.L.R.(2d) 1; 14 C.B.R.(3d) 145, refd to. [para. 29].

Andrews et al. v. Grand & Toy (Alberta) Ltd. et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229; 19 N.R. 50; 8 A.R. 182; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 577; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 452; 3 C.C.L.T. 225, refd to. [para. 30].

Woelk v. Halvorson, [1980] 2 S.C.R 430; 33 N.R. 232; 24 A.R. 620; [1981] 1 W.W.R. 289; 14 C.C.L.T. 181; 114 D.L.R.(3d) 385; 7 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 30].

Roche v. Newfoundland and Nugent (1995), 136 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 285; 423 A.P.R. 285 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

Walsh v. O'Toole et al. (1996), 139 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 6; 433 A.P.R. 6 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 32].

Baird v. Butler et al. (1994), 124 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 225; 384 A.P.R. 225 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 32].

Slaney v. Ellis and Hickman Motors Ltd. (1993), 108 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 339 A.P.R. 181 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 32].

Kolonel v. Kenny (1992), 98 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 311 A.P.R. 1 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 32].

Benedict v. Sealand Helicopters Ltd. and McGuire (1993), 111 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 66; 348 A.P.R. 66 (Nfld. T.D.), dist. [para. 32].

McCallum v. Ritter (1990), 83 Sask.R. 303; 72 D.L.R.(4th) 49 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Benstead et al. v. Murphy et al. (1994), 157 A.R. 198; 77 W.A.C. 198; 23 Alta. L.R.(3d) 251 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Kroeker v. Jansen et al. (1995), 58 B.C.A.C. 1; 96 W.A.C. 1; 123 D.L.R.(4th) 652 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Thornton v. Board of School Trustees of School District No. 57 (Prince George) et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 267; 19 N.R. 552; [1978] 1 W.W.R. 607; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 480; 3 C.C.L.T. 257, refd to. [para. 38].

Teno et al. v. Arnold et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 287; 19 N.R. 1; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 609; 3 C.C.L.T. 272, refd to. [para. 38].

Wall v. McGrath (1996), 139 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 208; 433 A.P.R. 208 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 38].

Nugent v. Pittman et al. (1994), 124 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 174; 384 A.P.R. 174 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 41].

Knoblauch v. Biwer (1992), 104 Sask.R. 31 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 48].

Mayes v. Ferguson and Stettner (1992), 102 Sask.R. 250 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 48].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Cooper-Stephenson, Kenneth D., and Saunders, Iwan B., Per­sonal Injury Damages in Canada (1st Ed. 1981), generally [para. 18].

Cooper-Stephenson, Kenneth D., and Saunders, Iwan B., Personal Injury Damages in Canada (2nd Ed. 1996), c. 7, p. 520 [para. 36]; pp. 510, 511 [para. 43]; 781, 782 [paras. 18, 22]; 783, 784 [para. 18].

Waddams, S.M., The Law of Damages (Rev. 2nd Ed. 1993)(Looseleaf Ed.), p. 3-30 [para. 39]; para. 13.590 [para. 22].

Counsel:

Dana Lenehan, for Alvin and Lorraine Pittman;

Gregory Smith, for Maura Beam;

Daniel Boone, for Frederick Mercer and Parker Enterprises Ltd.;

Christopher Pike, for Katherine Waterman.

This appeal was heard on October 1, 1996, before Gushue, C.J.N., Mahoney and Cam­eron, JJ.A., of the Newfoundland Court of Appeal.

On January 15, 1997, Cameron, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.