Can a crumbling skull argument succeed where there is no measurable risk that loss or injury would have occurred without the accident?

Ontario, Canada


The following excerpt is from Hartwick v. Simser, 2004 CanLII 34512 (ON SC):

Athey v. Leonati, supra, paragraph 36, also established that the crumbling skull argument cannot succeed where there is no finding of any measurable risk that loss or injury would have occurred without the accident. In the absence of such a finding, there can be no basis to reduce the award to take into account any such risk.

Other Questions


What is the time for an action for damages from injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident to be commenced within two years of the date of the accident? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the crumbling skull doctrine and what is the thin skull rule? (Ontario, Canada)
Can a plaintiff argue that pre-existing medical conditions, unrelated to any car accident, be taken into account in the context of a crumbling skull theory? (Ontario, Canada)
How does the "crumbling skull" rule apply to determine liability in a motor vehicle accident? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff’s life would have gone without the tortious injury? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for a plaintiff to prove hypothetical events such as how their life would have proceeded without a tortious injury? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a divisible injury, such as an injury to the same area of the body, impossible to separate? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for determining that a claim is not without merit in a personal injury case? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law supporting the argument that misrepresentation can occur even in the absence of overt representation? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for finding a plaintiff liable for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident? (Ontario, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.