Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter, (1995) 135 Sask.R. 81 (QB)

JudgeKlebuc, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Case DateSeptember 07, 1995
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations(1995), 135 Sask.R. 81 (QB)

Kozak v. Funk (1995), 135 Sask.R. 81 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Ernest Kozak (plaintiff) v. Howard Funk (defendant)

(1987 Q.B. No. 914)

Ernest Kozak (plaintiff) v. Andy Nutter (defendant)

(1988 Q.B. No. 4972)

Indexed As: Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Saskatoon

Klebuc, J.

September 7, 1995.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued for damages for losses suffered as a result of injuries incurred in two motor vehicle accidents. The plaintiff had also suffered an intervening injury. Each defendant admitted negligence but denied that his negligence caused the injuries or the losses claimed. They also disputed the quan­tum of damages. The actions were tried concurrently.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench assessed and apportioned damages accord­ingly.

Damage Awards - Topic 11

Injury and death - Continuing pain (incl. chronic pain syndrome) - [See Damage Awards - Topic 181 ].

Damage Awards - Topic 177

Injury and death - Neck injuries - Aggra­vation of pre-existing condition - [See Damage Awards - Topic 181 ].

Damage Awards - Topic 178

Injury and death - Neck injuries - Whip­lash - The plaintiff suffered a moderate extension-flexion injury in a motor vehicle accident - Temporary restrictions in neck movements, spasms in the trapezium muscle and crepitation (grinding sound) in the cervical spine - No sensory loss or neurological problems - Missed 2.3 months of work - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench awarded $10,000 non-pecuniary damages - See paragraphs 27, 54.

Damage Awards - Topic 181

Injury and death - Neck injuries - Dislo­cation of cervical spine - The plaintiff suffered a moderate extension-flexion injury in a motor vehicle accident - Subsequently, he injured himself lifting a heavy object - He suffered a disk hernia­tion - Substantial pain, surgical interven­tion and extensive physiotherapy - A further motor vehicle accident resulted in chronic pain - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the disk hernia­tion and related problems were attributable 90% to the lifting injury and 10% to cer­vical spine weakness caused by the first accident - The court assessed general damages of $10,000 for the extension-flexion injury; $45,000 for the disk hernia­tion (to be reduced by the $10,000 already awarded and then by the 90% attributable to the plaintiff's own negligence); and $75,000 for the chronic pain (to be reduced by the previously assessed $45,000 damages).

Damages - Topic 1011

Mitigation - In tort - Personal injuries - Treatment for - [See Torts - Topic 62 ].

Damages - Topic 1536

General damages - Elements of general damages - Loss or impairment of house­keeping capacity - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench refused to award damages for loss of housekeeping capacity for tasks the plaintiff would have been able to perform had he complied with suggested medical treatment regimes - The court awarded $6,000 for loss of capacity to paint the exterior of his home from time to time - See paragraphs 81, 82.

Damages - Topic 1550

General damages - General damages for personal injury - Prospective loss of wages or earnings (incl. formula) - [See Damages - Topic 1556 ].

Damages - Topic 1556

General damages - General damages for personal injury - Calculation and method of assessment - Contingencies - Deduc­tion for - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that to calculate the present value of the future employment income a plaintiff would have earned but for a defendant's negligence, the following items must be identified: "(1) the plaintiff's life expectancy; (2) the length of the plaintiff's work life (usually age 65); (3) a 'general' contingency factor; (4) a discount factor; (5) a multiplier; (6) a specific con­tingency factor for the plaintiff; and (7) a projection of what the plaintiff's future earning capacity would have been but for the defendants' negligence" - See para­graph 73 - The court discussed the terms "general contingency", "discount factor", "multiplier factor" and "specific contin­gency" - See paragraphs 76 to 79.

Damages - Topic 1567

General damages - General damages for personal injury - Future care and treatment - The 50 year old plaintiff suffered injuries in two motor vehicle accidents and a lifting accident - He suffered from chronic pain and spent $260 yearly on medication, mostly Tylenol 3 - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench awarded $4,712 for cost of future care - See paragraph 83.

Torts - Topic 54

Negligence - Causation - "But for" test - In a personal injury case, the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench discussed the law of causation - The court stated that the "but for" test described by Denning, L.J., in Cork v. Kirby Maclean Ltd. was generally applied in Canada - The court stated that the burden of proof of causation never shifts to the defendant but an inference may be drawn where common sense dictates despite the lack of evidence or medical unanimity regarding factual causation - See paragraphs 23 to 25.

Torts - Topic 62

Negligence - Causation - Intervening causes (novus actus interveniens) - A plaintiff failed to comply with prescribed medical regimes following two accidents - The defendants alleged that the plaintiff's failure to mitigate was a novus actus - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench rejected the argument - The plaintiff may have suffered considerably less pain, would have enjoyed a better quality of life, and would have recovered to the extent of working a 40 hour monthly sedentary job, but he would not have made a substantial recovery - However, the failure to mitigate remained material to the assessment of damages - The court reduced the plaintiff's damages against the second defendant by 25% - See paragraphs 41, 64.

Torts - Topic 65

Negligence - Causation - Evidence - [See Torts - Topic 54 ].

Cases Noticed:

Snell v. Farrell, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 311; 110 N.R. 200; 107 N.B.R.(2d) 94; 267 A.P.R. 94, refd to. [paras. 23, 24].

Cork v. Kirby Maclean Ltd., [1952] 2 All E.R. 402 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Matthews et al. v. MacLaren et al. - see Horsley v. MacLaren.

Horsley v. MacLaren (1969), 4 D.L.R.(3d) 557 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 23].

McGhee v. National Coal Board, [1973] 1 W.L.R. 1; [1972] 3 All E.R. 1008 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 24].

Alphacell Ltd. v. Woodward, [1972] 2 All E.R. 475 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 24].

Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corp. (1959), 361 U.S. 107 (U.S. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 24].

Asamera Oil Corp. v. Sea Oil & General Corp. et al. - see Baud Corp. N.V. v. Brook.

Baud Corp. N.V. v. Brook, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 633; 23 N.R. 181; 12 A.R. 271; [1978] 6 W.W.R. 301, refd to. [para. 40].

Michaels et al. v. Red Deer College, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 324; 5 N.R. 99; [1975] 5 W.W.R. 575, refd to. [para. 40].

Finch v. Herzberger, [1993] 4 W.W.R. 179; 107 Sask.R. 230 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 40].

Cooper v. Miller (No. 1), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 359; 164 N.R. 81; 41 B.C.A.C. 1; 66 W.A.C. 1; 113 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [paras. 42, 43, 70].

Cunningham v. Wheeler - see Cooper v. Miller (No. 1).

Shanks v. Miller - see Cooper v. Miller (No. 1).

Ratych v. Bloomer, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 940; 107 N.R. 335; 39 O.A.C. 103; 69 D.L.R.(4th) 25, refd to. [para. 42].

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, refd to. [paras. 45, 50, 53].

Lindal v. Lindal, [1981] 2 S.C.R. 629; 39 N.R. 361, affing. [1982] 1 W.W.R. 419; 115 D.L.R.(3d) 745 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 45].

Lewis v. Todd et al., [1980] 2 S.C.R. 694; 34 N.R. 1; 115 D.L.R.(3d) 257, refd to. [para. 45].

Joubert v. Rosetown (Town) and Sled (1986), 50 Sask.R. 41 (Q.B.), revd. (1987), 60 Sask.R. 200 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 45, 73, 76].

Fobel v. Dean and MacDonald, [1991] 6 W.W.R. 408; 93 Sask.R. 103; 4 W.A.C. 103; 83 D.L.R.(4th) 385 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1992] 2 W.W.R. lxxii; 138 N.R. 404; 97 Sask.R. 240; 12 W.A.C. 240 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 45, 62, 81].

Clarke v. British Columbia Electric Rail­way, [1950] 3 D.L.R. 161 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Demyen v. Sirounis (1991), 93 Sask.R. 66; 4 W.A.C. 66 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46 et seq.].

Bunce v. Flick et al., [1991] 5 W.W.R. 623; 93 Sask.R. 53; 4 W.A.C. 53 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46 et seq.].

Dagenais v. Glombowski (1987), 56 Sask.R. 60 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 46].

Long v. Thiessen (1968), 65 W.W.R.(N.S.) 577 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

Blewett v. Kavanagh (1981), 13 Sask.R. 72 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 47, 48].

Mayes v. Ferguson and Stettner (1992), 102 Sask.R. 250 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 47, 58].

Szekely v. Chandler; Szekely v. Bauer et al. (1991), 96 Sask.R. 141 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 47].

Dominquez v. Risling (1995), 127 Sask.R. 241 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 47, 49].

Berns et al. v. Campbell et al. (1974), 59 D.L.R.(3d) 44 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [paras. 48, 49].

Penner v. Mitchell, [1978] 5 W.W.R. 328; 10 A.R. 555; 89 D.L.R.(3d) 343 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 50, 67, 70].

Baker v. Willoughby, [1970] A.C. 467 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Wolverine and Bernard, [1987] 3 W.W.R. 475; 59 Sask.R. 22 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 51].

Bruch v. Gregg and Gregg (1990), 86 Sask.R. 294 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 56].

Lepage v. Turlock (1993), 108 Sask.R. 248 (Q.B.), refd to [para. 57].

Bouchard v. Kirstein, Nagel and Mang (1983), 25 Sask.R. 79 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Knoblauch v. Biwer, [1992] 5 W.W.R. 725; 104 Sask.R. 31 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 57, 61, 63].

Ede v. Junek and Hart, [1991] 1 W.W.R. 60; 87 Sask.R. 126 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Adam v. Johnson Estate, [1994] 8 W.W.R. 438; 121 Sask.R. 283 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 61, 63].

Graham et al. v. Rourke (1990), 40 O.A.C. 301; 74 D.L.R.(4th) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 62, 63].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canada, Statistics Canada, Employment Income by Occupation Report, generally [para. 65].

Cooper-Stephenson, Kenneth D., and Saunders, Iwan B., Personal Injury Damages in Canada (1981), p. 259 [para. 76].

Saskatchewan, Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, Labour Report (1990-94), generally [para. 65].

Saskatchewan, Department of Labour, Wages and Working Conditions by Oc­cupation, Sixteenth Report 1992, gen­erally [paras. 65, 66].

Solomon, Feldthusen and Mills, Cases and Materials on the Law of Torts (2nd Ed. 1986), p. 339 [para. 23].

Counsel:

R.L. Borden, for the plaintiff;

P. Foley, Q.C., for the defendant.

These actions were heard by Klebuc, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Saskatoon, who delivered the following decision on September 7, 1995.

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal) v. Fraser Health Authority, [2016] 1 SCR 587
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • June 24, 2016
    ...32; Caswell v. Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries, Ltd., [1940] A.C. 152; Kozak v. Funk (1997), 158 Sask. R. 283, aff’g in part (1995), 135 Sask. R. 81; Meringolo v. Oshawa General Hospital (1991), 46 O.A.C. 260, leave to appeal refused, [1991] 3 S.C.R. vii; Canadian Union of Public Emplo......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Remedies: the Law of Damages. Second Edition Part Three
    • September 8, 2008
    ...27, 34–35, 347, 350, 366, 368 Kozak v. Funk (1995), [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79, 135 Sask. R. 81, 28 C.C.L.T. (2d) 53 (Q.B.) ........................................................................... 433 Krangle (Guardian ad litem of) v. Brisco, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 205, 208 D.L.R. (4th) 193, [2002] S.C......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Remedies: The Law of Damages. Third Edition Limiting Principles
    • June 21, 2014
    ...[1967] 3 All ER 686, [1967] 3 WLR 1491 (HL) ................29, 39, 40, 395, 397, 417, 418, 419 Kozak v Funk (1995), [1996] 1 WWR 79, 135 Sask R 81, 28 CCLT (2d) 53 (QB) .........................................................................498, 499 Krangle (Guardian ad litem of) v Brisco......
  • H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., (2001) 208 Sask.R. 183 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • May 10, 2001
    ...(1986), 50 Sask.R. 41 (Q.B.), affd. (1987), 60 Sask.R. 200 (C.A.), appld. [para. 53]. Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter, [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79; 135 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), revd. in part [1998] 5 W.W.R. 232; 158 Sask.R. 283; 153 W.A.C. 283 (C.A.), appld. [para. 53]. S.P. v. F.K., [1997] 3 W.W.R. 161; 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal) v. Fraser Health Authority, [2016] 1 SCR 587
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • June 24, 2016
    ...32; Caswell v. Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries, Ltd., [1940] A.C. 152; Kozak v. Funk (1997), 158 Sask. R. 283, aff’g in part (1995), 135 Sask. R. 81; Meringolo v. Oshawa General Hospital (1991), 46 O.A.C. 260, leave to appeal refused, [1991] 3 S.C.R. vii; Canadian Union of Public Emplo......
  • H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., (2001) 208 Sask.R. 183 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • May 10, 2001
    ...(1986), 50 Sask.R. 41 (Q.B.), affd. (1987), 60 Sask.R. 200 (C.A.), appld. [para. 53]. Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter, [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79; 135 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), revd. in part [1998] 5 W.W.R. 232; 158 Sask.R. 283; 153 W.A.C. 283 (C.A.), appld. [para. 53]. S.P. v. F.K., [1997] 3 W.W.R. 161; 1......
  • Cisecki v. Nipawin (Town), (2000) 192 Sask.R. 161 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • March 16, 2000
    ...2 W.W.R. xxii; 138 N.R. 404; 97 Sask.R. 240; 12 W.A.C. 240, refd to. [para. 39]. Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter, [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79; 135 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), revd. in part [1998] 5 W.W.R. 232; 158 Sask.R. 283; 153 W.A.C. 283 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39]. Behm v. Patterson et al. (1999), 176 Sa......
  • Daum v. Schroeder et al., (1996) 143 Sask.R. 192 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • April 2, 1996
    ...v. Herzberger, [1993] 4 W.W.R. 179; 107 Sask.R. 230 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 40]. Kozak v. Funk; Kozak v. Nutter, [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79; 135 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. McCallum v. Ritter, [1990] 5 W.W.R. 660; 83 Sask.R. 303; 72 D.L.R.(4th) 49 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46]. Bookhalter v. H......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Remedies: The Law of Damages. Third Edition Limiting Principles
    • June 21, 2014
    ...[1967] 3 All ER 686, [1967] 3 WLR 1491 (HL) ................29, 39, 40, 395, 397, 417, 418, 419 Kozak v Funk (1995), [1996] 1 WWR 79, 135 Sask R 81, 28 CCLT (2d) 53 (QB) .........................................................................498, 499 Krangle (Guardian ad litem of) v Brisco......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Remedies: the Law of Damages. Second Edition Part Three
    • September 8, 2008
    ...27, 34–35, 347, 350, 366, 368 Kozak v. Funk (1995), [1996] 1 W.W.R. 79, 135 Sask. R. 81, 28 C.C.L.T. (2d) 53 (Q.B.) ........................................................................... 433 Krangle (Guardian ad litem of) v. Brisco, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 205, 208 D.L.R. (4th) 193, [2002] S.C......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT