ActuarialEvidence (1)

ActuarialEvidence (1) - Actuarial Evidence UWO Presentation...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–6. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Actuarial Evidence UWO Presentation November 30, 2010 Overview I. Tort Law Background II. Types of Losses III. Actuarial Evidence by Experts IV. CIA Actuarial Evidence Standard
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
© Thomas Schinbein Actuarial Services Inc. November 30, 2010 1 I. TORT LAW BACKGROUND · Current Approach to Valuing Damages based on Supreme Court of Canada 1978 Trilogy [ Trilogy = Andrews v. Grand & Toy, Thortonton v. Board of School Trustees of School District No57, (Price George) and Arnold v. Teno ] · In trilogy, the Supreme Court outlined the principles and methods to use in determining damages. · Losses are now on an itemized basis instead of a global award approach. · Itemized basis relies heavily on statistical, actuarial and economic evidence presented by experts. · Supreme Court also accepted the principle that there should be full compensation for all pecuniary ( monetary ) losses. · Plaintiff ( injured person ) should not be required to accept something less than full restoration to their pre-accident living conditions.
Background image of page 2
© Thomas Schinbein Actuarial Services Inc. November 30, 2010 2 Trial Process · Plaintiff has the responsibility to present actuarial and economic data on losses (damages). · Since the Court system is adversarial, both sides generally retain their own experts to present their theory (scenario) of the case. · Court’s role is to select evidence it thinks is most accurate or reject both parties’ evidence and proceed with its own position. · Most Personal Injury cases settle out of court. Contingencies · In applying trilogy approach, the courts acknowledge that future losses could be adjusted to some extent to reflect the impact of future events. · In Lewis & Todd, the Supreme Court encouraged contingency deductions supported by actuarial data to provide the courts with a guide to help reach the proper decision.
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
© Thomas Schinbein Actuarial Services Inc. November 30, 2010 3 II. TYPES OF LOSSES Four Main Categories of Losses: 1) Special Damages - Pretrial Pecuniary (Monetary) Losses ( Also Called Past Losses ) 2) Future Earnings / Income Losses ( Pecuniary Loss ) 3) Future Care Costs ( Pecuniary Loss ) 4) Non-Pecuniary Loss for Pain and Suffering ( $ 100,000 From January 1978, Indexed ) · Actuarial Evidence is involved in items 1 to 3.
Background image of page 4
© Thomas Schinbein Actuarial Services Inc. November 30, 2010 4 Common Types of Future Losses With Itemized Approach A) Personal Injury Claims · Income Losses Wage Group Benefits Employer Sponsored Pension Plan Benefits
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 6
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This document was uploaded on 12/01/2010.

Page1 / 15

ActuarialEvidence (1) - Actuarial Evidence UWO Presentation...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 6. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online