Court-ordered Structured Settlements for Personal Injury Damage Awards /

It is the Commission’s belief, however, that some of the information gathered in the preliminary stages of this project may be of some interest and use to the Bench, the Bar and the public. [...] The legislation further provides by way of subjective criteria that the Court must find that a structured settlement is in the plaintiff’s “best interests” or in the event that a tax gross-up is requested, that a structured settlement “is not contrary to the best interests of the plaintiff.” British Columbia legislation while mandatory provides a court with wide discretion hinged on the plaintiff’ [...] The Court is, however, expressly prohibited from making any such order if the parties otherwise consent or if the Court is of the opinion that the order would not be in the best interests of the plaintiff having regard to all the circumstances of the case. [...] In fact, it is noteworthy that in Wilson, the Court, in supporting the trial judge’s position, and rejecting a structure, referred to a number of factors, to be considered, including the ongoing necessity for future medical and financial care, a dependancy on a future source of income for the remainder of their lives in order to meet their needs, and the possibility that the victims might ultimate [...] For these reasons, I will order that the full amount of the award for future care in the cases of each of these two plaintiffs be structured in accordance with the example of the consumer price indexed structure submitted by the defendant.”16 It is to be noted that in respect of the concern raised by the plaintiffs that a structure was not liquid and therefore could not respond to future unexpecte