Dimopoulos v. Mustafa et al, 2016 ONSC 429

Released January 19, 2016 | Full Decision

This “threshold” motion was brought by the defendant while the jury was deliberating. The collision had occurred more than 12 years earlier. In the interim, Mr. Dimopoulos was awarded $37,000 for general damages and $30,000 for future chiropractic care.

Mr. Dimopoulos reportedly was in perfect health prior to the collision at age 49. Following the collision, he experienced ongoing constant neck pain, with shoulder and back pain and regular headaches. As a result of his chronic pain he continued to experience significant sleep disturbance.

Prior to the collision, Mr. Dimopoulos’ work history was intermittent as a result of his limited education. He generally worked in labour-intensive jobs. While he was unemployed at the time of the collision, he had recently been employed as a labourer and security guard on a movie set. He was seeking employment at the time of the collision. He admitted that there were irregularities in his reported income.

Following the collision, he managed to secure employment through his wife’s work in a sedentary position. He was able to perform his duties with pain.

Justice Tzimas held that Mr. Dimopoulos had suffered a permanent serious impairment of a physical function. She found that his and his wife’s testimony was credible, and that his claim was supported by the evidence of Dr. Wilson, the Plaintiff’s Orthopedic expert, and by Mr. Yip the FAE assessor.

Specifically, her Honour preferred this expert testimony to that of Dr. Hugh Cameron for the defendants. Dr. Cameron was forced to acknowledge that his assessment had lasted 10 minutes. Justice Tzimas found that his dismissive attitude was based on the assumption that since most injuries similar to those suffered by Mr. Dimopoulos healed within weeks or several months, his should also have healed.

In view of Dr. Wilson’s two hour assessment, and his evidence that there was no issue with malingering or invalidity, her Honour put little weight on Dr. Cameron’s identification of symptom magnification. Following Malfara v. Vukojevic, she observed that Dr. Wilson had appropriately considered the effect of Mr. Dimopoulos’ impairments from a functional viewpoint, as opposed to considering merely the type of injury sustained, as Dr. Cameron appeared to have done.


Read the full decision on CanLII

Written by

Keith was raised in Etobicoke, and is excited to return to the GTA in order to practice plaintiff personal injury law. After his call to the Bar in 2009, Keith worked briefly for TD Insurance as in-house legal counsel, prior to moving to London for family reasons. He has spent the last two years working exclusively in plaintiff personal injury and medical malpractice law with a leading firm.

Through his volunteer work, he has written for The Monarch, the Brain Injury Association of London and Region’s quarterly magazine and sat on their Community Outreach committee. He was also a member of the Spinal Cord Injury of Ontario’s Fundraising Committee 2013-2014.

Keith is devoted to his wife and two boys. He loves to cook, and enjoys a good book when he isn’t working.