McPhail v. Ross

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
JudgeAdair
Citation2019 BCSC 21
Date09 January 2019
Docket NumberS149600

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
18 practice notes
  • Klose v. Chybisov
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • February 26, 2021
    ...damages of $32,500 was appropriate based upon Kaur v. Tse, 2020 BCSC 1072; Nagaria v. Dhaliwal, 2018 BCSC 569; McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21; and Carter v. Zhan, 2012 BCSC 595. [119] In all the circumstances, I find that an award of $90,000 is appropriate in this case. I find the cases prov......
  • Carleton v. Warner
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • March 25, 2020
    ...Pandher, 2017 BCSC 1732, non-pecuniary loss of $70,000. [130] The defence should relies upon the following authorities: McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21, non-pecuniary loss of Tisalona v. Easton, 2015 BCSC 565, non-pecuniary loss of $32,000; McKay v. Raiwal, 2015 BCSC 220, non-pecuniary loss o......
  • Healey v. Mault
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 10, 2021
    ...The flaw in her reporting is a matter of reliability, not credibility. [103]     As stated in McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21 at para.101, “I am not obliged to reject all of a witness’s evidence simply because I have concluded the witness is not credible or r......
  • Sweeney v. Yu
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 2, 2021
    ...complaints and a reason to treat her evidence about those with caution. [136]     As stated in McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21 at para. 101, “I am not obliged to reject all of a witness’s evidence simply because I have concluded the witness is not credible or......
  • Get Started for Free
13 cases
  • Klose v. Chybisov
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • February 26, 2021
    ...damages of $32,500 was appropriate based upon Kaur v. Tse, 2020 BCSC 1072; Nagaria v. Dhaliwal, 2018 BCSC 569; McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21; and Carter v. Zhan, 2012 BCSC 595. [119] In all the circumstances, I find that an award of $90,000 is appropriate in this case. I find the cases prov......
  • Simpson v. Eedens
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 25, 2022
    ...example, I will cite Sweeney v. Yu, 2021 BCSC 2133, specifically at para. 136: [136]    As stated in McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21 at para. 101, “I am not obliged to reject all of a witness’s evidence simply because I have concluded the witness is not ......
  • Carleton v. Warner
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • March 25, 2020
    ...Pandher, 2017 BCSC 1732, non-pecuniary loss of $70,000. [130] The defence should relies upon the following authorities: McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21, non-pecuniary loss of Tisalona v. Easton, 2015 BCSC 565, non-pecuniary loss of $32,000; McKay v. Raiwal, 2015 BCSC 220, non-pecuniary loss o......
  • Sweeney v. Yu
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 2, 2021
    ...complaints and a reason to treat her evidence about those with caution. [136]     As stated in McPhail v. Ross, 2019 BCSC 21 at para. 101, “I am not obliged to reject all of a witness’s evidence simply because I have concluded the witness is not credible or......
  • Get Started for Free