In reasons for judgment released earlier this year, the court in Scelsa v. Taylor, 2016 BCSC 1122 denied the plaintiff reimbursement of the $800.00 cost of an MRI. There was no dispute that the MRI was necessary, but the court held that the defendant should not pay the cost because "a publicly funded option was available" and the plaintiff had not demonstrated that the need for the MRI was "urgent". The court said:
 The defendants have agreed to pay special damages of $6,002.60,
excluding only $800 claimed for a private MRI...The plaintiff failed to show an urgent need to obtain a private MRI when a publically funded option was available... Accordingly, the plaintiff is awarded special damages of $6,002.
The full text of the decision can be found here: http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc1122/2016bcsc1122.html?resultIndex=1