As a resident of Nova Scotia, there are 3 rights, which they can be pursued, after the same resident gets injured in a motor vehicle accident.
What are those rights?
• The right to sue the responsible party.
• The right to have a submitted claim adjudicated in court
• The right to recover damages from the person responsible for the accident.
The limitations on those rights:
The claimant must have a cause of action. That is a specific set of facts, facts that must be proven, in order to obtain a desired compensation. The claimant must adhere to the timeline established by law. That means that a lawsuit must be filed within 2 years of either the date when the injury was sustained, or the date when a reasonable person would have chosen to make a claim. An exception to that deadline for filing a lawsuit gets made if the injured victim was a child. In that case, the limitation period gets suspended until the child reaches the age of 18.
The government has put restrictions on the types of injuries that can become the basis for filing a personal injury lawsuit. The victim’s injury must be serious or permanent. Moreover, the plaintiff must prove that the assessed value of the declared damages matches with the claimed cost of damages.
Besides putting restrictions on the types of injuries that can become the basis for a personal injury lawsuit, the government has also put a cap on the amount of money that the courts can award to any plaintiff that has claimed pain and suffering in a personal injury lawsuit. That capped amount is $400,000.
How Canadian lawyers deal with that cap:
That cap applies to non-pecuniary damages, and not to other damages. In other words, it does not put a limit on the compensation for medical expenses or the replacement of a plaintiff’s lost income. Consequently, a plaintiff’s attorney remains free to produce evidence that supports the awarding of a larger compensation for those particular losses.
For instance, Personal Injury Lawyer in Moncton can argue that their client’s injury has caused him or her to lose future earning opportunities. The lawyer’s argument might be backed-up by facts produced by an economist. That economist might show that the plaintiff’s injury would keep him or her from taking on the responsibilities of a job that had the same earning power as the plaintiff’s earlier jobs.
Such facts could be used to support claims of a reduced earning power. That claim could be added to the acknowledged figure for the plaintiff’s lost wages. The summed claims might amount to a decidedly large figure. Consequently, that figure might serve as a decent substitute for the small pecuniary damages, which are allowed by law.