KSW Lawyers Partner Featured in Canada’s Top 50 Lawyers.
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
Home
> Lawyer Content
> Blog title on how to fine the perfect lawyer

Successful Cases

Explore our triumphs: Dive into our success cases, showcasing our ability to secure favourable verdicts and settlements for our clients. From personal injury to business disputes, our skilled legal team has a proven track record of delivering positive results. Gain insight into our expertise and how we can help you with your legal needs

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
WCAT No. A1602170
We acted for a landscape construction company that was fined just under $32,000 when two of its workers failed to wear a seatbelt while driving a tractor on a large construction project in Abbotsford. After an appeal to WCAT, the penalty was downgraded to a lesser category and cut in half.
Read More
WCAT No. A1602501
Chris represented a professional engineer who suffered a serious fall resulting in compression fractures to his spine. His pension claim got lost in the system and never adjudicated. After we were retained, WorkSafeBC corrected the issue but decided to end his permanent disability pension at age 65, despite his intentions to work past that date. We appealed to WCAT and won; as a result, the pension will be paid until age 75, resulting in over $120,000 of extra compensation for the client.
Read More
WCAT No. A1604204
Chris represented the developer of a large construction project in Abbotsford that was fined almost $60,000 in two separate penalty orders for alleged safety contraventions on site. After an initial review, the Review Division doubled the second penalty, increasing the total fine to $90,000. We appealed to WCAT and it was determined the Review Division’s reasoning was flawed. As a result, the second penalty was cancelled altogether and the fine reduced to less than $30,000.
Read More
Royal Canadian Legion Branch Maple Ridge Branch #88 v Service, Health, Manufacturing and Allied Workers Union, CLAC Local 501, 2016 CanLII 44229 (BC LRB)
Chris represented the Employer in defending a reconsideration application before the Labour Relations Board involving the description of a bargaining unit in the context of a union raid application. The union’s resonsideration application was denied.
Read More
Sidhu v. Sever, 2014 BCPC No. 20971, Abbotsford Registry
Chris represented the claimant in a breach of contract action regarding a construction dispute. After a four day trial, our client was awarded judgment. The judgment was unique in that the court accepted our client’s argument for compensation based on contractual restitution under the principles of quantum meruit.
Read More
WCAT No. A1602170
We acted for a landscape construction company that was fined just under $32,000 when two of its workers failed to wear a seatbelt while driving a tractor on a large construction project in Abbotsford. After an appeal to WCAT, the penalty was downgraded to a lesser category and cut in half.
Read More
Desrochers v. Teksmed Services, 2013 BCHRT 56
Our client was terminated from employment during a medical leave. The employer applied to dismiss her complaint to the Tribunal, partly because of a concurrent employment standards proceeding. The Tribunal dismissed the employer’s application and found the case had a reasonable prospect of success. It was settled shortly after the decision.
Read More
G.R. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission, 2016 SSTGDEI
Client applied for EI benefits and was denied. The main issue was whether the Appellant lost his employment by reason of his own conduct, specifically being terminated for absenteeism. Chris was able to successfully show that his client’s actions did not constitute misconduct.
Read More
Gibson v Matthies, 2017 BCSC 839
Chris represented the defendant in a claim brought by the plaintiff in relation to a motorcycle accident. After a three-day trial on liability, the Court determined that the plaintiff was 75% responsible for the accident.
Read More