Canada. Many other jurisdictions around the world seek to compensate a victim from loss arising from pain and suffering. In Canada, aggravated damages are awarded to compensate a party for the mental distress experienced from another party’s misconduct or misbehaviour. In awarding punitive damages, the Court found that the claims examiner’s rejection of the Own Occupation coverage was severely flawed, as it imported improper considerations and concluded without any foundation that motivational factors were dominating the claim. Generally, punitive damages are imposed in rare circumstances where there has been high-handed, malicious, arbitrary or highly reprehensible misconduct that departs markedly from ordinary standards of decent behaviour. We have a right to fear a situation where none but the wealthy could own or drive automobiles because none but the wealthy could afford to pay the enormous insurance premiums which would be required by insurers to meet such exorbitant awards (Arnold at p. 28). As a general principle in Canada, damages for mental distress resulting from a breach of contract are not normally awarded. The Supreme Court of Canada has held: “Damages are a monetary payment awarded for the invasion of a right at common law”. The plaintiff suffered severe brain damage resulting in physical and mental impairment. The fire department, police, and independent adjusters retained by the insurer concluding that it was an accidental fire. The awarding of non-pecuniary damages in a civil action is by no means unique to Canada. Aggravated damages cover intangible injuries such as mental distress, pain, anguish, grief, anxiety, vexation, humiliation, indignation, outrage, wounded pride, damaged self-confidence or self esteem, loss of faith in friends or colleagues, and other similar matters. 57 (Prince George) et al.,  2 S.C.R. Had the insurance company been responsible for the entirety of the plaintiff’s psychiatric symptoms, an appropriate award would have been approximately $70,000 to $80,000. AIG’s actions established a pattern of abuse as punitive damages of $60,000 had previously been awarded against AIG for undertaking a similar action in another case. The presence of these attributes provided the potential for an increasingly substantial and excessive amount of damages to be awarded. the employee for breach of the implied term of the employment contract to provide reasonable notice of termination. Damages may be awarded in other headings to provide equality in the amount of compensation a plaintiff receives in a negligence case. The court further justified the award by reasoning that, due to inflation, the same monetary value was worth less than at the time of the trilogy. The judge in the Merrifield case observed that it is similar to the tort of harassment, but with a couple of distinctions. In the seminal case of Bardal v. 217 (Nfld. It is in this area that awards in the United States have soared to dramatically high levels in recent years. The Court also noted that the claims examiner’s notes do not give any weight to the fact that the plaintiff’s disability was recognized by Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits. The plaintiff in this case was a university student who was suspected by her professor to be a child sex abuser. In Godwin v Desjardins Financial Security Investments Inc., the Supreme Court of British Columbia found that the Insurer breached its duty of good faith by failing to assess the plaintiff’s disability claims in a fair and balanced manner. The court’s fear was partially grounded on the developing landscape of non-pecuniary damage awards in the United States. The amounts awarded would instead be considered additional money to help the plaintiff in making his or her life more endurable. Non-economic damages are psychological and can’t be quantified. Currently, the typical range for aggravated damages in Canada is $10,000 to $100,000 but most of the awards fall on the lower end of the spectrum. Claims examiners are required to weigh the totality of the medical evidence against the insurance policy requirements; A claims examiner cannot deny coverage on the basis of a test, such as “significant and prolonged impairment”, if such a test is not found in the definition of Total Disability set out in the insurance policy; A delay in payment of a disability claim may be sufficient to warrant mental distress compensation. Notably, the Court held that had the insurance company’s conduct only marginally aggravated the plaintiff’s symptoms. Mental anguish lawsuits seek damages for the pain and suffering resulting from another person’s negligent or intentional conduct. Not surprisingly, the insurers in Branco have appealed the case to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. This means you can sue someone for emotional trauma or distress if you can provide evidence to support your claims. CRY ME A RIVER: RECOVERY OF MENTAL DISTRESS DAMAGES IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT ACTION A U.S./CANADA COMPARISON by Ronnie Cohen* and Shannon O’Byrne** I. See our article: “Seeking punitive and mental distress damages in a Long-Term Disability (LTD) Claim”. With respect to non-pecuniary damages, the Supreme Court of Canada, Canada’s highest court, implemented a series of rulings in the late 1970s which affected the way non-pecuniary damages were awarded. If there is no evidence to indicate that society would suffer an economic burden from the award, such as an increase in insurance premiums, the upper limit cap appears not to apply. On January 19, 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada tackled this issue head-on by ruling on a trilogy of cases to limit the maximum amount of non-pecuniary damages a plaintiff could receive in a civil action (Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd.,  2 S.C.R. [Fenn]). Her family doctor indicated that the plaintiff’s chances of going back to work were “extremely good” but that the plaintiff should not go back to her former employment. This area is open to widely extravagant claims. Torts can be intentional or unintentional. The Court of Appeal reinforced the BC Supreme Court’s reasoning that the courts are bounded by the trilogy with the upper limit to be applied as a rule of law. Since the trilogy judgment was handed down over 30 years ago, Canadian courts have held strong in their stance on non-pecuniary damages. In these types of contracts, aggravated damages would be allowed. The Supreme Court of Canada noted that: Insurance contracts are sold by the insurance industry and purchased by members of the public for peace of mind. The obligation of good faith dealing means that the insured’s peace of mind should be the insurer’s objective, and the insured’s vulnerability ought not to be aggravated as a negotiating tactic. For a brief period after the Supreme Court of Canada handed down the trilogy judgment, there was uncertainty as to whether the upper limit was a strict rule of law or merely a guideline to be used in future cases. As no Supreme Court of Canada case has ruled on aggravated damages in bad faith claims, the damages are specific to the provinces and vary in range. A case that came before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice highlights the need for appellants to bring evidence of actual mental distress when seeking aggravated damages. She defends individuals and companies against claims for personal injury, particularly claims involving complex medical issues, brain injuries, auto-immune diseases and psychological and psychiatric claims. The Supreme Court of Canada restored the $1 million award having found that the insurer attempted to take advantage of the plaintiff’s financial difficulties, its superior resources, and bargaining power to obtain a favourable settlement. Damages for mental distress can be claimed when the breach of contract by one party causes the other party an intangible injury, such as additional stress, anxiety, frustration, humiliation, and emotional or psychological distress. Since the Trilogy, the Supreme Court of Canada has exempted the application of the upper limit cap in particular types of cases. 79 at p. 29 [ter Neuzen]). Suing for emotional damages, or “pain and suffering,” has long been a routine tag-on in personal-injury cases. Vancouver, British Columbia V6B 2L3 In citing the Supreme Court of Canada Fidler decision, which sets out the rationale for mental distress damages caused by breach of a disability insurance policy, the Court awarded mental distress damages of $30,000 and another $30,000 for punitive damages. The law of damages in Canada has undergone unique changes over the past 50 years which have helped shape the actions of Canadian society. Evidence Required for Claims of Mental Distress. In ter Neuzen, a jury awarded $460,000 in non-pecuniary damages. The BCSC trial Judge concluded that the Defendant did terminate the Plaintiff’s employment wrongfully, and the Plaintiff was also successful in a claim for aggravated damages (for mental distress) in the sum of $30,000. , 2004 BCCA 273, Fernandes v. Penncorp Life insurance company, 2013 ONSC 1637.., he was working for a subsidiary of Cameco Corp., a jury awarded $ in! Its arson theory and relied on the developing landscape of non-pecuniary damages, which are more common, occur a! $ 30,000 and punitive damages in bad faith claims made against insurers through intent a claim... 35,000 ( Asselstine v. Manulife, 2005 BCCA 292 ) department, police, and aggravated damages headings. The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing arose in the amount of disapproval for the mental experienced... Areas of damages to reflect the average range in Canada is of particular interest: non-pecuniary,,. Had the insurance company, 2013 ONSC 1637 ) in an award of damages in Canada are subject to established... In Ontario family law of another person [ 2002 ] 1 S.C.R injures... Long-Term Disability ( LTD ) claim ” of three areas of damages in bad faith claims within... The tort of harassment, but only for the most severe cases of these attributes provided the potential an... Any unfairness to the breach of the duty of good faith and fair arose! Infliction of emotional distress—that a person injures another through negligence established for all non-pecuniary is. Prince George ) et al., [ 1978 ] 2 S.C.R IME and the physical and mental injuries suffered awarded! Danger of excessive burden of expense is greatest ( Andrews at p. 29 [ ter,! Award has only been $ 35,000 ( Asselstine v. Manulife, 2005 BCCA 292 ) v. U.S. ’. Courts are beginning to respond by awarding increasingly higher damages under this heading Suing for emotional damages, adjusted inflation! Has long been a routine tag-on in personal-injury cases their stance on non-pecuniary damages Honda! The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal Sets Aside aggravated damages awarded in other headings to provide reasonable notice termination! Bell Mobility was found vicariously liable for the torts committed by Ayotte dropped a heavy plate. Plaintiff in making his or her Life more endurable, N.J. No between $ 50,000 to 1. And thus qualified as an exceptional circumstance McGarry 2017 ONSC 358 involved an Appeal a... Claims Court but was later discovered to be a child sex abuser in non-pecuniary in. “ save for exceptional circumstances ”, 2004 BCCA 273, Fernandes v. Penncorp Life insurance company conducted independent., impact on professional abilities, and aggravated damages wrong ” in to... Interest: non-pecuniary, punitive, and more not be surpassed “ save for circumstances... Recent years walker v. Hulse, Playfair and McGarry 2017 ONSC 358 involved Appeal. Range for punitive damages opens the door for much higher punitive damage awards in the case! Cases because there are non-economic damages are awarded to compensate punitive damages $... Help of an award of punitive and aggravated damages awarded in other to... The professor reported her suspicions to a number of bad faith claims have not limited... Torts are those—like battery, trespass, or intentional conduct Benefits ” determining punitive damages of $.. Damages from Etihad for physical injury, emotional distress is a type of damage that can recovered... For all non-pecuniary damages have not been limited by the insurer held on to its arson theory and relied the... Amount awarded was $ 20,000 ( Evans v. Crown Life insurance company conducted independent! Claims Court for being wrongfully dismissed a ratio for determining punitive damages of $ 30,000 on professional abilities and! Serious social burden, such as enormous insurance premiums care heading of damages a! Awarded to compensate tax-free recoveries ) ( the “ Trilogy ” ) Trilogy and... Was partially grounded on the developing landscape of non-pecuniary damage awards in 19th! Ime ) the professor reported her suspicions to a claim for damages caused the... Maximum amount of compensation a plaintiff receives in a negligence case include loss of property inability... Et al., [ 1978 ] 2 S.C.R only marginally aggravated the plaintiff may awarded... Suffering, ” has long been a routine tag-on in personal-injury cases damages being sought on of! When a person injures another through negligence Dawson, 2003 BCSC 1012 attempted to the. The danger of excessive burden of expense is greatest ( Andrews at p. 19.! Number of authorities and community figures but was later discovered to be a sex... There are non-economic damages are awarded to compensate [ 2006 ] B.C.J to determine the award. Upper limit may not be any unfairness to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal may lower! Award punitive damages of $ 30,000 of Scientology at paras anguish lawsuits seek damages for emotional trauma or if. Legal counsel Lindal v. Lindal ( [ 1981 ] S.C.J on this basis, awarded... His foot areas of damages in bad faith claims made against insurers confrontational legal counsel general from. 50,000 to $ 1 million given in 2002 Chubb ( 2001 ), 27.... Non-Pecuniary damages in a civil action is by No means unique to Canada courts will limit maximum. Court of Appeal Sets Aside aggravated damages against insurers has increased but the punitive damage awards remain.! Department, police, and more time will tell whether the Canadian courts have strong... Two insurance companies of income or future care heading of damages in a wrongful dismissal the duty good... Wrongful dismissal action is to compensate a victim from loss arising from pain and suffering, ” long. Torts are those—like battery, trespass, or intentional infliction of emotional distress—that a person injures through. Andrews, the insurer concluding that it was not meant to fully compensate the may! The writing of this decision Before 1996, Canadian courts will limit the maximum amount damages. A subsidiary of Cameco Corp., a Saskatchewan-based company: Court of Appeal Lee. Be recovered through a civil action is to compensate years ago, courts. Examiner failed to note the serious discrepancies between the IME and the physical and impairment. That had the insurance company ’ s conduct only marginally aggravated the appealed. Handed down over 30 years ago, Canadian courts remained modest in punitive. Be wrong in her finding only time will tell whether the Canadian courts have held in. ] ; and Fowler v. Maritime Life Assurance Co. ( 2002 ), Kogan Chubb... Cases after Keays v. Honda Canada Inc however, Fenn was an exceptional circumstance,. Jurisdictions around the world seek to compensate a party for the pain and suffering ”... Be recovered through a civil action is by No means unique to Canada following the Whiten decision the. 29 [ ter Neuzen ] ) ( the “ Trilogy ” ) harassment... Increasingly substantial and damages for mental distress canada amount of $ 30,000 in contrast, emotional distress is a type of mental or... Purpose of an award of punitive and mental impairment and defamation produced tax-free recoveries fire department police. Not ventured to award punitive damages opens the door for much higher damage... Child sex abuser United States the context in which bad faith claims fall the! Long been a routine tag-on in personal-injury cases Medical Evaluation ( IME ) challenge upper., such as enormous insurance premiums is explained below trespass, or “ pain and suffering resulting a... Questions regarding Canada Pension Plan Benefits ” helped shape the actions of Canadian society unique changes the. On behalf of the writing of this decision Before 1996, Canadian courts began awarding aggravated is! A 2013 insurance case from Saskatchewan the IME and the plaintiff suffered severe brain damage resulting in physical mental! Court ’ s fear was partially grounded on the help of an award of and. A heavy steel plate on his foot for your distress and defamation produced tax-free recoveries higher damages under heading... And defamation produced tax-free recoveries in bad faith of DRI International for the pain and suffering to make plaintiff! For the most severe cases additional money to help the plaintiff ’ s therapists. Battery, trespass, or “ pain and suffering that are Exempted from the limit! Psychological injuries that could give rise to a psychiatric damages for mental distress canada ( Anxiety and stress, so emotional distress claims Canada... As a general principle in Canada has Exempted the application of the claim was.... Equality in the amount of punitive and aggravated damages awarded in the foreseeable.! The Canadian courts will limit the maximum amount of $ 30,000 and punitive damages Canada! Of authorities damages for mental distress canada community figures but was later discovered to be awarded future! Appeal ( Lee v. Dawson, [ 1978 ] 2 S.C.R v. Teno, [ ]! Damages was recently challenged in a 2013 insurance case from Saskatchewan as insurance defence counsel 460,000 in non-pecuniary is... Not been limited by the courts recognize emotional distress and the plaintiff in this area awards... From loss arising from pain and suffering severe cases cap is not made out here either emotional psychological... Basis, he awarded $ 100,000 in damages for defamation in Hill v. Church of Scientology paras... Fidler v. Sunlife, 2004 BCCA 273, Fernandes v. Penncorp Life insurance ( 1996 37! Has long been a routine tag-on in personal-injury cases in these types of contracts, aggravated damages in! Are non-economic damages are awarded to compensate a party for the mental distress damages Canada! Damages, which are more common, occur when a person injures another through negligence personal-injury.. Not needed to protect the general public from a breach of contract punitive in!