Is a plaintiff’s mental health impairment a contributory factor in determining whether she is entitled to compensation for cleaning services provided to her client?

Housekeeping services have economic value. The loss or impairment of a plaintiff’s capacity to perform them is, therefore, compensable: Harrington v. Sangha, 2011 BCSC 1035.

The governing principles that apply to awards for the loss or impairment of housekeeping capacity were summarised by Newbury J.A. in Dykeman v. Porohowski, 2010 BCCA 36. As noted by Dardi J. in X. v. Y., 2011 BCSC 944: 246 ... She affirmed that damages for the loss of housekeeping capacity may be awarded even though the plaintiff has not incurred any expense because housekeeping services were gratuitously replaced by a family member. Recovery may be allowed for both the future loss of ability to perform household tasks as well as for the loss of such abilities prior to trial. The amount of compensation awarded must be commensurate with the plaintiff’s loss: Dykeman at para. 29.

When housekeeping services have been provided by other household members a claim for compensation must be scrutinised carefully. Although grievous injury need not be established, the court should ask whether the services went above and beyond the ordinary give and take to be expected in a home and were required by the plaintiff’s injuries or would have been performed in any event. A relatively minor adjustment of duties within a household will not justify a discrete award under this head of damages: Dykeman, Campbell v. Banman, 2009 BCCA 484. Position of the Parties