Where a trial judge finds a plaintiff's evidence on damages to be deliberately misleading, an assessment of non-economic loss must be consistent with those credibility findings, and uncertainty created by the false evidence should be resolved against the plaintiff. A finding of continuing disability requires explanation and justification where it is in tension with the judge's own findings about the plaintiff's activities and credibility. An expert opinion based on inaccurate instructions as to the mechanism of injury cannot support a finding of negligence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.