Law360 Canada ( December 2, 2025, 9:53 AM EST) -- Appeal by appellant from trial judge’s damages award. The appellant suffered personal injuries in a motor vehicle collision with the respondent. The appellant was in the course of his employment as a hospital transfer driver when the collision occurred. He was therefore eligible for benefits from WorkSafeBC. In the judgment under appeal, the trial judge awarded damages to the appellant for personal injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident. On appeal, the sole ground of appeal advanced by the appellant was that the trial judge erred in failing to include amounts paid by WorkSafeBC (WorkSafe Payments) in the award of damages. The respondent filed a written submission indicating that he was not opposed to the relief sought. However, even where the respondent consented, the appellate Court would not allow an appeal without first satisfying itself that there was a proper legal basis for interfering with the decision of the court below. In this case, there were three specific reasons why the Court must satisfy itself that there was a proper basis for the relief sought by the appellant. First, the point raised on appeal turned on a question of statutory interpretation, and the Court had an overriding responsibility to ascertain whether the interpretation adopted by the trial judge was in error and the interpretation urged by the appellant was sound. Second, this was the first time this point of statutory interpretation was raised in this Court, and the result would be binding on the lower courts. Third, the point raised involved some consideration of public policy, because it addressed the requirements for proof of damages in a subrogated claim intended to allow WorkSafeBC to recover amounts paid for the benefit of an injured worker....