If you settled an ICBC claim sometime in the past, and you have a new injury resulting in a new claim, are the details of the previous settlement relevant?
In today’s case of Dholliwar v. Yu, there had been three motor vehicle collisions over the course of two and a half months, all three resulting in personal injury claims by the same unlucky victim. The first two claims were settled, leaving the third, and the insurance company defending the third sought documentation related to the first two settlements. Granting the order, Master Scarth had the following to say:
 It has yet to be established here that the injuries arising from the third accident are indivisible from those in the first and second. However, on the basis that indivisibility is at issue, and that there is potential for over-compensation, it is appropriate to require disclosure of the settlement documents at this time. I accept the submission of the defendants that such disclosure is necessary, in that it may assist in the settlement of the plaintiff’s claims arising from the third accident. Disclosure at this time is consistent with the previous decisions of this Court in Pete and Murray. I am satisfied that the defendants here do not seek a purely tactical advantage, as the Court found in Phillips v. Stratton, 2007 BCSC 1298, but rather, they wish to have the information necessary to assess their exposure, both for purposes of settlement and in the preparation of their case for trial.