In the case of Smith v Ries dated August 17, 2023, an involved a motor vehicle accident occurred at a Vancouver intersection involving plaintiff James Smith and the car of defendant, Lily Ries. Smith, a passenger in an SUV, sustained soft tissue injuries that led to chronic pain, depression, and a stress disorder, necessitating medical interventions, including nerve rerouting. This had left him partially disabled. The main dispute revolved around quantifying Smith's past and future loss of earning capacity. At 31 years old during the accident, Smith had claimed significant damage to his earning potential, asserting he would have been a construction manager if not for the accident's impact. The defendant challenged this, questioning the extent of the causal link between the accident and Smith's psychological injuries and economic losses. The damages assessment ultimately hinged on uncontested facts and medical opinions. The court had awarded Smith the following: - Non-pecuniary damages: $125,000 - Past loss of earning capacity: $280,000 (subject to tax adjustment) - Future loss of earning capacity: $550,000 - Cost of future care: $65,482 - Special damages: $19,224 Court-ordered interest was granted for past pecuniary losses. The court had deemed this damages package fair to both parties. Regarding costs, Smith had been entitled to Scale B expenses, and parties could have applied for adjustments related to s. 83 and s. 98 Insurance (Vehicle) Act deductions, considering the claim's presentation through the Workers Compensation Act.