Diminished Housekeeping Capacity

In my last post before taking a hiatus (November 2006), I wrote about how the law is changing to better reward unpaid housework which is largely performed by women.  Since then I have done two trials where loss of housekeeping capacity formed a significant part of the award.

In O'Rourke v. Everett, 2009 BCSC 1277, the judge awarded my client $18,720 for loss of housekeeping capacity.  The replacement work was performed by her husband.  The law does not, nor should it, require that the work be paid for by an outside provider.  The logic is that wealthy people can afford to replace the loss of housekeeping services, where modest income people could not.  Therefore the rich would be receiving better treatment under the law. In reality, that statement is probably true, however, our courts in British Columbia strive to develop case law consistent with equality values in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Read the case for yourself:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/09/12/2009BCSC1277.htm

In Grewal-Cheema v. Tassone, 2010 BCSC 1182 the judge awarded $12,000 for loss of childcare services for the time that Ms. Grewal-Cheema was attending rehabilitation treatments.  Ms. Grewal-Cheema's husband rearranged his schedule to look after their child while his wife was at treatment.  The loss, however, is Ms. Grewal-Cheema's and not the husband's.  This type of claim is easy to overlook, but can be the difference between winning and losing a case.  Here is a link:
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/10/11/2010BCSC1182.htm

To my colleagues - I encourage you to push the law to drive towards equality.

To my clients - I give you my committment to know the law and search out evidence with you to prove all elements of your ICBC claim.