The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

A SUPREME Court judge dismissed a woman’s personal injury claim against American Bridge Bahamas Limited (ABL) after she claimed the company’s Jeep Wrangler struck her, causing serious injuries.

Justice Deborah Fraser ruled that the statute of limitations barred Jannette Taylor’s claim. She found that allowing the case to proceed to trial despite being clearly barred under section 9 of the Limitation Act would be “frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of the court’s process”.

The case stems from an incident in January 2019, when Ms Taylor was allegedly struck by a Jeep Wrangler owned by ABL and driven by Jose Ramon Zayas Sepulaveda. 

She claimed the injuries from January 2, 2019, prompted her to seek medical treatment in Miami, Florida, and New Providence. From January 7, 2019, onwards, she reportedly made numerous trips to medical professionals in both locations for diagnoses and treatment.

She said by early 2020, she experienced severe new pain in her neck and back and reported memory issues, leading to further consultations in New Providence. She said her condition prevented her from driving, causing her to rely on taxis and others for transportation.

She said on October 27, 2021, she was diagnosed with memory loss and additional injuries to her neck and hand. She was admitted to Princess Margaret Hospital on November 3, 2021, with symptoms including sudden heaviness and weakness on her left side, dizziness, and vision problems. Her condition reportedly worsened by February 20, 2022.

Justice Fraser found that the limitation period for Ms Taylor’s claim began on January 25, 2019, or February 6, 2019, when she became fully aware of her injuries. Under the Limitation Act, personal injury claims must be filed within three years of this awareness. Consequently, Ms Taylor had until January 25, 2022, or February 7, 2022, to initiate her claim, according to the judge.

Ms Taylor’s argument that her disability should have extended the limitation period was not accepted by the court. Evidence showed she managed her own affairs and arranged medical appointments, contradicting her claim of being incapacitated.

“Ms Taylor knew about her injuries and their extent either on January 25, 2019, when the MRI was conducted, or on February 6, 2019, when the doctor referred her for physiotherapy sessions,” Justice Fraser wrote. “Time began to run against her under section 9 of the Limitation Act when she became aware of the significance of her injuries and their attribution to the defendant she wished to sue.”

“Even if the claimant requests the court to extend the time for the injuries claim under section 9 of the Limitation Act, which are generally addressed at trial, the court is not empowered to do so. Section 9 requires strict adherence to the time for filing personal injury claims as ‘equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent.’ The claimant did not justify the delay beyond the three-year limit.”

Because Ms Taylor’s claim was struck out, she must pay ABL’s legal costs, which are to be assessed if not agreed upon by both parties.