Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Damages for Mental Distress and Bad Faith in Disability Claims

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines recent changes in the law in Canada in relation to the court’s willingness to acknowledge the significance of, and award compensation for, intangible loss arising from breach of contract. When a claim for benefits is wrongly refused in a disability contract, a primary goal of the contract, which is to provide peace of mind, is unrealized. Where this causes mental distress, Canadian courts are now willing to award compensation. Similarly, if an insurer conducts itself in such a manner as to attract a punitive damages award, a consideration in assessing the quantum of the award is the vulnerability of the insured. The evidentiary basis for these claims will often include expert psychological opinion. Various considerations for determining the existence, nature, and scope of the psychological issues relevant to a claim for damages for mental distress and/or punitive damages are covered in this article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Hadley v. Baxendale (1984). 9 Ex.341,156 E.R. 145.

  2. Fidler v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada, 2006 SCC 30, [2006] S.C.J. No. 30.

  3. Id. at para. 44.

  4. Id. at para. 45.

  5. Id. at paras. 56, 57 and 58.

  6. Gerber v. Telus Corp. [2003]. A.J. No. 849, affirmed [2004] A.J. No. 371—award of $20,000 (Alta. C.A.). Lumsden v. Manitoba [2007]. M.J. No. 330—award of $45,000, reduced on appeal to $25,000 [2009] M.J. No. 48 (Man. C.A.). Asselstine v. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company et al. 2003. BCSC 1119, affirmed 2005 BCCA 292—award of $35,000 (B.C.C.A.). Monks v. ING Insurance Co. of Canada [2005]. O.J. No. 2526, 24 C.C.L.I. (4th) 1, affirmed [2008] O.J. No. 1371, 90 O.R. (3d) 689—award of $50,000 (Ont. C.A.). Clarfield v. Crown Life Insurance Co. [2000]. O.J. No. 4074, 50 O.R. (3d) 696—award of $75,000 (Ont. S.C.).

  7. Goodson v. American Standard Insurance Co. of Wisconsin, 89 P. 3d 409.

  8. Royal Maccabees Life Ins. Co. v. Choren, 393 F.3d 1175, 1181 (10th Cir. 2005).

  9. Paul Revere Life Insurance v. Sucharov, [1983] 2S.C.R. 541.

  10. Gill v. Zurich Insurance Co., [1999] O.J. No. 4333.

  11. Lain v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America 279 F.3d 337.

  12. See Fidler, supra, at para. 63.

  13. Whiten v. Pilot Insurance Co. (2002), 209 D.L.R. (4th) 257 at p. 301, para. 114.

  14. Hangarter v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 373 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2004).

  15. Daubert v.Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

  16. R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2S.C.R. 9, 114 D.L.R. (4th) 419.

  17. Janiak v. Ippolito, [1985] 1S.C.R. 146.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faith Hayman Law Corporation, #210-900 Howe St., Vancouver, BC, Canada, V5Z 2M4

    Faith E. Hayman

Authors
  1. Faith E. Hayman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faith E. Hayman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hayman, F.E. Damages for Mental Distress and Bad Faith in Disability Claims. Psychol. Inj. and Law 2, 248–253 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-009-9052-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-009-9052-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation