Legal & Industry Insights from Reeves Richarz LLP

Threshold Motion Decision and Jury’s Verdict

 

In Debruge v. Arnold , the plaintiff appealed the decision of the trial judge on the defendant’s threshold motion. One of the grounds of appeal was whether the trial judge erred by granting the defendant’s threshold motion after receiving a jury verdict which implicitly concluded that the plaintiff’s injuries and claims exceeded the threshold. This appeal was dismissed on the basis that a jury’s verdict is only one factor that the trial judge may consider, but is not bound to consider, in coming to his or her ultimate conclusion regarding the threshold motion.

The defendant brought a cross-appeal on the issue of whether the trial judge erred by excluding the decision on the threshold motion from the costs analysis. The cross-appeal was granted, based on the reasoning of the Divisional Court in Saleh v. Nebel, in which the decision on the threshold motion should be taken into account when considering the issue of costs of the trial.

Debruge v. Arnold

 

  • Reeves Richarz, LLP is a Canadian full-service law firm serving corporate and personal law needs. With a long history of serving Canada’s property and casualty insurers, institutions that self-insure property and casualty risks, we now bring that level of detail and diligence to issues such as real estate, family law, wills and estates and private matters.

It's time to get Reeves Richarz on your side.

Find out how our breadth of experience can help you.

Related Articles