Law360 Canada (June 10, 2024, 2:55 PM EDT) -- Claim by plaintiff for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff's vehicle ("Aspen") collided with a van. She did not suffer any injury from the first collision though the front end of her Aspen was damaged, together with other vehicles ahead of the van involved in the collision. The plaintiff and her passenger were instructed by the fire chief to wait inside the Aspen. However, the defendant's vehicle struck the Aspen from behind, causing it to spin roughly 180 degrees in a clockwise direction to face north (second collision). The plaintiff complained of a lot of pain, including soft tissue and chronic pain injuries. She reported to various practitioners, service providers and experts on the severity of her pain, particularly in her left shoulder and neck area. She signed a longer description of the collisions for her insurers. The defendants argued that the first collision might have been the cause of the injury to the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought compensation for soft tissue injuries and the psychological impact on her daily living, as well as the resulting financial consequences, including early retirement from long-term employment. The defendants acknowledged responsibility for general damage sustained in the second collision. However, other claims were disputed including inordinate voluntary services, future costs of care, loss of future income and pension entitlement. They submitted that they would not compensate the plaintiff for any debilitating effects of the pre-existing condition that she would have experienced....