Law360 Canada ( October 29, 2019, 8:13 AM EDT) -- Action by Block for damages for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Block was a 46-year-old self-employed businesswoman. At the time of the collision, she was employed full-time, operating her own health and wellness business. Prior to the collision, Block was very active and regularly participated in activities such as tennis, badminton, biking and hiking. She was married with two children, ages 21 and 18. The accident occurred on November 26, 2013. Block was the owner and operator of a vehicle that was sideswiped on the driver’s side by a vehicle owned by the defendants, the Schmitts. The Schmitt vehicle did not stop, but the police eventually caught up to it. At all material times, the Schmitts’ son was the operator of the Schmitt vehicle. He did not have a valid BC driver’s license at the time of the collision and the defendants denied that they gave their consent for him to operate the Schmitt vehicle. The defendants denied liability for the accident. Block took the position that s. 86(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act (MVA) was disjunctive, such that vicarious liability was established on proof that the driver of the vehicle was a member of the family of the owner and living with the owner at the time of the collision. Block argued that, in such circumstances, consent of the owner was immaterial. The defendants argued that consent was not provided and that their son was only temporarily living with them. Among other damages, Block was seeking a general damage award of $90,000 and an award for loss of future earning capacity in the range of $250,000. The defendants, while denying liability, questioned the extent and nature of Block’s injuries and their impact on her employment, and her recreational and domestic activities. The defendants submitted that a reasonable award for non-pecuniary damages was in the range of $22,000 to $30,000. They argued that Block failed to mitigate her damages....