Hobbs v Wapshott

In the case of Hobbs v Wapshott, the plaintiff, who was 29 years old at the time of injury, sought damages for personal injuries sustained due to cervical and thoraco-lumbar injuries. The injuries resulted in a whole person impairment between 10% and 15% and caused the plaintiff to suffer from depression and anxiety, albeit for a brief period. The plaintiff also experienced some physical restrictions on their capacity to work, which affected their employment choices and made them more vulnerable in the job market. The court had to assess the general damages, considering the lack of a sufficient past earnings history to support a purely mathematical calculation of the loss of future earning capacity. The court was tasked with determining how to make a global assessment for the loss of future earning capacity where the loss was more than nominal.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were the method of assessing general damages in the context of the plaintiff's injuries, and how to appropriately evaluate the loss of future earning capacity given the circumstances. The court had to consider the extent of the impairment, the impact on the plaintiff's employment capacity, and the appropriate way to quantify the loss of future earning capacity where a mathematical calculation was not feasible. The court needed to balance the plaintiff's age, the degree of impairment, the impact on their ability to work, and the short-term nature of the depression and anxiety in determining the appropriate amount of damages.

The court concluded that the assessment of general damages should take into account the whole person impairment, the physical restrictions on the plaintiff's capacity to work, and the vulnerability in the job market. The court found that a global assessment of the loss of future earning capacity was appropriate, considering the plaintiff's age and the degree of impairment. The court determined that the plaintiff was entitled to damages of $126,670.70, reflecting the whole person impairment, the impact on the plaintiff's employment capacity, and the short-term nature of the depression and anxiety. The court found in favour of the plaintiff and awarded the specified amount of damages.

The final orders of the court were that judgment be entered for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $126,670.70. This amount reflected the appropriate compensation for the plaintiff's injuries, taking into account the whole person impairment, the impact on their capacity to work, and the short-term nature of the depression and anxiety. The court's decision provided a clear method for assessing general damages in similar cases involving personal injuries with physical restrictions on employment capacity and a degree of whole person impairment.