Chen v. Horvath
Danny Chen
Law Firm / Organization
Brij Mohan & Associates
Lawyer(s)

Brian Yu

James Horvath
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

J. Morris

Background:
Danny Chen sued James Horvath, a claims examiner at the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC), over threats Horvath allegedly made during settlement negotiations. In April 2020, Horvath reportedly threatened to expose Chen’s involvement in money laundering and running a brothel if he didn’t settle a motor vehicle accident claim. Chen claimed these false accusations pressured him into settling for less and caused him emotional distress.

Legal Issues:
Chen filed claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, intimidation, and defamation. Horvath moved to strike the emotional distress and intimidation claims, arguing they did not constitute valid legal claims.

Court's Analysis
The court found Chen’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress was inadequately pleaded, lacking necessary details such as extreme conduct and visible illness. The intimidation claim was also dismissed because it did not specify an unlawful act. The court considered whether Horvath’s actions were protected by absolute privilege during litigation communications but did not conclusively rule on this issue.

Disposition:
The court struck Chen’s claims for intimidation and emotional distress, granting him 30 days to amend his pleadings. Costs of the application were ordered to be in the cause, meaning they would be determined later.

Supreme Court of British Columbia
S232121
Tort law
Defendant