Law360 Canada (February 2, 2024, 6:16 PM EST) -- Appeal by appellants, Cameron and D & T Heating and Plumbing Ltd., from trial judge’s findings on grounds that trial judge erred in law in determining appellants had onus to prove Pratt's injuries fell within the minor injury cap. Cross-appeal by Pratt that trial judge erred in her interpretation of serious and erred by applying Smith v. Stubbert when assessing non-pecuniary general damages for Pratt's concussion. Pratt was travelling on his motorcycle when Cameron, in a van owned by D & T Heating and Plumbing Ltd., pulled out from its parking spot in the path of Pratt's motorcycle, resulting in a collision. At trial, the appellants admitted they were at fault for the accident but did not admit causation or damages. In her consideration of whether the injuries fell within the cap, the trial judge found the onus was on the appellants to prove, on a balance of probabilities, Pratt's injuries were subject to the minor injury cap....