Is a jury’s appreciation of pain, suffering and loss of amenities wrong if the award does not fall within the range of awards for non-pecuniary damages?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Dilello v. Montgomery, 2005 BCCA 56 (CanLII):

Non-pecuniary awards are inherently arbitrary and, because of this, the jury members’ subjective appreciation of the plaintiff’s pain, suffering and loss of amenities is not necessarily wrong if the award does not fall into the range of awards that have been made by trial judges in similar cases. As Mr. Justice Smith noted in Boyd v. Harris, supra:

Other Questions


What are the non-pecuniary damages for loss of amenities, pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the range of damages for pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life and non-pecuniary loss of income? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the range of general or non-pecuniary damages for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are non-pecuniary damages for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is a non-pecuniary award for pain and suffering? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the range of damages for non-pecuniary damages in a personal injury action? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the range of damages for non-pecuniary damages in a personal injury case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the range of damages for non-pecuniary damages in a motor vehicle accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff's claim for loss of housekeeping capacity compensated by a pecuniary or non-pecuniary award? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are non-pecuniary damages for loss of enjoyment of life and loss of amenities? (British Columbia, Canada)

There are no other similar questions at this time.