7-Eleven Ordered to Pay Nearly $1M After Rejecting Injured B.C. Woman’s $125K Settlement Offer
7-Eleven has been ordered to pay $907,000 in damages — plus double court costs — after a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled the company wrongfully rejected a $125,000 settlement offer from an injured woman.
The case centered on Chrystal Tommy, who suffered a serious ankle injury after tripping on a pothole outside a 7-Eleven store in Smithers on May 2, 2018. The fall led to ongoing complications, emotional distress, and significant financial losses.
Court Sides With Plaintiff After Rejected Offers
In a ruling issued on April 25, Madam Justice Emily Burke highlighted that Tommy made three reasonable settlement offers, including the first at $125,000 plus health care expenses. All of them were far less than the final trial award of $907,363.
Despite these efforts, 7-Eleven denied any liability and chose to proceed to trial.
“I agree the reality in this case was a plaintiff with limited means suffering financially while awaiting the litigation process,” Burke stated, underscoring the burden litigation placed on Tommy.
Advertisement
The court determined that Tommy’s offers should have been accepted and emphasized that refusing reasonable settlements wastes court resources. As a result, the judge ordered 7-Eleven to pay double court costs under a precedent aimed at encouraging early resolutions.
Damages Awarded: Breakdown
In a September 2024 ruling, Justice Burke awarded Tommy $907,363, which included:
- Past and future wage loss
- Costs for housekeeping
- Non-pecuniary damages for pain and suffering
- Special damages
- Future care costs
The Injury and Its Impact
Tommy’s injury has had long-term consequences on her health and financial stability. She was unable to work, experienced ongoing pain, and faced limitations in day-to-day life.
The court’s decision acknowledges not just the physical harm, but also the emotional and financial toll the incident — and the delayed settlement — had on her life.
Advertisement
Legal Precedent and Future Implications
This ruling may serve as a strong message to corporations: rejecting fair settlement offers can come at a high cost. The case also reinforces the legal principle that litigation should not be prolonged unnecessarily when viable settlement options are on the table.
Would you have taken the initial settlement offer, or gone to court like Chrystal Tommy? Share your thoughts below.
More…
- https://vancouversun.com/news/7-eleven-to-pay-907000-to-injured-b-c-customer-who-offered-to-settle-for-125000
- https://www.nanaimobulletin.com/news/7-eleven-forced-to-pay-double-costs-to-smithers-woman-for-not-settling-out-of-court-8020087
- https://www.cfnrfm.ca/2025/05/21/smithers-woman-awarded-nearly-1m-in-lawsuit-against-7-eleven-judge-orders-double-court-costs
Advertisement
