An award for past economic loss based on total incapacity for work cannot stand where the trial judge has found the plaintiff has residual earning capacity, has unreasonably refused alternative employment, and has made no attempt to retrain. The tension between the plaintiff's burden to prove loss of earning capacity and the defendant's burden under s 136(4) to prove failure to mitigate remains unresolved, but the defendant does not bear a legal burden to demonstrate a particular level of residual earning capacity. The principle of coherence requires the same approach to assessing the plaintiff's most likely circumstances but for the injury to be adopted for both past and future economic loss.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.