In the case of Moore v 7595611 Canada Corp (2023), the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that there is no maximum cap for damages related to the loss of care, guidance, and companionship under the Family Law Act. Family members, including spouses, children, and siblings, can seek these damages if an injury or death results from someone else’s negligence.
The case stemmed from a tragic 2013 house fire. A fire broke out in a basement apartment with inadequate safety measures. The respondents' 24-year-old daughter, Alisha, was trapped inside and suffered severe burns before ultimately being taken off life support.
The jury awarded damages as follows:
- Loss of care, guidance, and companionship: $250,000 to each parent
- Mental distress: $250,000 to each parent
- Future care costs: $174,800 for the father, $151,200 for the mother
The appellants appealed, arguing the damages were excessive, but the Court of Appeal upheld the jury’s decisions.
Key Issues on Appeal:
Mental distress: The appellants argued that mental distress damages should not have been awarded. The Court disagreed, confirming these damages compensated for the parents' psychological injuries, which were far beyond grief alone.
Future costs of care: The appellants also objected to the future care costs, but the Court of Appeal upheld these damages, noting that the awards were supported by trial evidence.
Loss of care, guidance, and companionship: The major issue on appeal was the quantum of these damages. The appellants cited To v Toronto Board of Education (1992), which was argued by JEWELL RADIMISIS JORGE LL.P’s own, the late Paul Jewell, Q.C. for the respondents. At that time, Mr. Jewell won the highest aware for the loss of care, guidance, and companionship in history. That case suggested a cap of $100,000 (adjusted for inflation). However, the Court of Appeal found that no such cap exists in Ontario law. The Court of Appeal referred to earlier cases, including Fiddler v Chiavetti, and concluded that damages for loss of care, guidance, and companionship are case-specific and based on the unique circumstances of each case.
The Court of Appeal affirmed that there is no legislative or judge-made cap on these types of damages. The appropriateness of damages is determined on a case-by-case basis, and the Court of Appeal emphasized that a high threshold exists for overturning a jury’s damage award. In this case, while the award was large, it did not shock the conscience of the Court.
The Moore decision clarifies that Ontario does not impose a cap on loss of care, guidance, and companionship damages. While this case involved extreme facts, it may signal a shift in how non-pecuniary damages are approached in Ontario.