Corina Bachmann is the principal of Bachmann Personal Injury Law. With offices in Simcoe, Lindsey and Toronto, Corina and her staff provide representation for Ontarians injured through the negligence of others.
Full Decision In the recent decision of Cyples v. Intact, the LAT clarified the test to be met for a catastrophic impairment (CAT) finding under criterion 8, as defined in s. 3.1(1)8 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). The case involved a motor vehicle collision that occurred on October 30, 2016, and a subsequent dispute as to whether the Applicant was CAT or not. Whereas …
Summary prepared for OTLA by Corina Bachmann of Bachmann Personal Injury Law Full Decision This case addresses the issue of what is a “reasonable explanation” for submitting the OCF-1 outside the timeline mandated by the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). The applicant, Ms. Buttenham, was involved in a motor vehicle collision on May 29, 2018. She advised her insurer of the collision the following day, …
Full Decision This case involves a dispute between the plaintiff and her insurer over the payment of Income Replacement Benefits (“IRBs”) beyond the first two years following the collision. The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision (“MVC”) on November 18, 2018. At the time of the collision, she was working at Mohawk College as a part-time professor teaching recreation therapy 1-6 hours per …
This was a voir dire heard by The Honourable Madam Justice L. Merritt. It involves a challenge by the plaintiff to one of the defence experts. Counsel for the defendants asked Merritt J. to qualify Dr. Michael Ford as an orthopaedic surgeon with experience in chronic pain and somatic symptom disorder; and the diagnosis, prognosis, causation and impairments relating to functionality and impairment. Counsel for the plaintiff opposed and asked the Court to exercise its jurisdiction as a gatekeeper and exclude Dr. Ford’s evidence, arguing that the cost of admitting his evidence outweighs its probative value.
This ruling involves a motion brought by the defendant for leave to call more than three experts at trial, and more specifically, a physiatrist and an orthopaedic surgeon.
This case involves a plaintiff who claimed personal injury damages after witnessing a very serious collision and its aftermath. The plaintiff happened to stand outside his aunt’s home when two cars collided and he
