Ask Ottawa Accident Lawyer Experts - Is it true that the vast majority of personal injury cases are settled?

Is it true that the vast majority of personal injury cases are settled?

Yes. The great majority of personal injury and accident claims are settled without requiring a trial. In fact, most cases are settled without even having to initiate legal proceedings or even ever stepping foot into Court. Litigation is very expensive, time consuming, stressful and involves significant risk financially. In most cases, with fair compromises, it is in every parties best interest to settle the claim out of Court.

When your case is settled, it will include compensation for all of your damages such as pain and suffering, income loss, out of pocket expenses, medical expenses etc... Settlements of personal injury claims, like most settlements, are final and legally binding agreements. They are final in that once a release is signed, an injured person can never claim compensation again in relation to the accident and injuries suffered as a result thereof.


If you have been injured in an accident, you may be entitled to compensation. At Plant Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki PC, we will assess and evaluate your injury case free of charge and let you know your rights and interests. We will give you options and tell you how to exercise them. We will take on your case on a No Fee Until You Win basis.


There are time limits which apply to every claim in Ontario and you should never delay in consulting a lawyer. You can contact us anytime by calling 613-563-1131 or by e-mail mquinn@pqtlaw.com for assistance.


At Plant Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki PC, we will:

1. Help you identify and establish your legal rights and entitlements.
2. Assess your case and let you know if you have a good case.
3. Assist in determining if someone was negligent in causing you injuries.
4. Review and obtain the evidence needed to prove your case.
5. Hire and refer you to needed medical and non medical experts.
6. Take any and all steps needed to obtaining compensation for you.
7. Examine and obtain a full list of all your claims, with needed supporting documents.
8. Prepare your claim to start the negotiation process to obtain a settlement with the insurance company.
9. Negotiate with the insurance company involved and settle your claim for fair and reasonable compensation.
   

It is important that you know your rights by calling us at 613-563-1131 or e-mail us at mquinn@pqtlaw.com. One call can make a significant difference to your claim. Marc-Nicholas Quinn, Lawyer and Mediator.

COSTS TO THE SELF-REPRESENTED PARTY

AWARDING COSTS TO THE SELF-REPRESENTED PARTY: By Michael Thiele

If a person goes to Court as a self-represented party, either as a defendant or plaintiff, is that person entitled to receive costs if they are successful on the motion or trial? This question is often raised by self-represented persons who are taking the time to act as their own lawyer. For many different reasons, but usually because of the high cost of hiring a lawyer, many persons are forced to represent themselves in Court. Accordingly, they spend a significant amount of time trying to do the work necessary to represent themselves.

For parties who are represented by lawyers, there is a possibility of recovering costs if they are successful in motions or at trial. Costs are discretionary, but the usual rule is that the successful party is entitled to receive costs. The costs are intended to indemnify a party for all or part of the legal fees incurred as well as the disbursements and taxes. The breadth and extent of costs being awarded is beyond the scope of this blog.

Where a person does not have a lawyer, but spends a lot of time working on their case, should they get “costs” in the same way that a party who has a lawyer gets “costs”. The argument for costs is generally that the self represented party has had to do the work that a lawyer had to do and therefore they should be compensated.

In recent years, Courts have recognized that individual self represented parties can receive costs under some circumstances. In fact, there appeared to be a trend to award “nominal” costs to self-represented litigants simply on the presumption that they should get “something” for the clear effort that must have been involved in representing themselves.

This practice of awarding nominal costs to self-represented parties is likely now a thing of the past with the decision in Mustang Investigations v. Ironside, 2010 ONSC 3444 (CanLII) (Div. Crt). In this decision, the Divisional Court reviews some of the recent cost awards to self-represented parties. In this specific case, the Court was considering a $20,000 cost award to a self-represented party and further it considered what would have been a “nominal” award of $5000 in costs to the same party that would have been awarded but for the higher cost award.

In reviewing the caselaw, including appellate authority, the Divisional Court in this case clarifies that costs awards to self-represented parties may only be granted where it is proven that the self-represented party performed the work of a lawyer and that this self-represented party as a result of performing this work also sacrificed other remunerative work---meaning the self-represented party needs to prove that they suffered an opportunity cost as a result of being self-represented.

It is significant to note, that even if a self-represented party establishes that they performed the work of a lawyer, and that they suffered the loss of remunerative work, that the Court directs that the costs awarded to that self-represented party should still be modest and moderate amount for preparing and presenting the case. The direction is clear, that a self-represented party should not have their costs calculated in that same manner as a lawyer.

As a result of this reasoning, the Divisional Court in this case, set aside the award of $20,000 to the self-represented party, and further indicated that the self represented party should not get the nominal costs of $5000.00. In fact, the self-represented party only received, as costs, its disbursements, and zero on account of the work done in representing himself.

For more detailed information see the decision in Mustang Investigations v. Ironside, 2010 ONSC 3444 (CanLII) (Div. Crt).