This Divisional Court appeal decision serves as a cautionary tale and provides some guidance on the type of evidence that should be advanced on a motion for an order to strike the jury in light of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the sufficiency of reasons for such a determination.
Travelers Insurance Company of Canada v. CAA Insurance Company 2020 ONCA 382
In a unanimous decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that mere presence of an office in Ontario does not itself make Ontario’s Insurance Act the governing legislation for all auto insurance policies that an insurer underwrites…
NM v The Guarantee Company of North America
This reconsideration decision helps shed some more light on the level of behaviour that will attract costs at the Licence Appeal Tribunal (“LAT”).
Tuffnail v. Meekes 2020 ONCA 340
This recent Court of Appeal decision addresses issues related to underinsured automobile coverage, joint liability and subrogation under the OPCF 44R (Ontario Policy Change Form 44R — Family Protection Coverage endorsement).
S.M. vs. Unica Insurance Inc., 2020 CanLII 12718 (ON LAT)
The bar for special awards at the LAT may have just been lowered in the wake of this recent LAT decision holding “there was a failure on the part of Unica or its agents to ask the relevant questions”…
McGowan v Green, 2020 ONSC 686
The Defendant brought a motion to compel the Plaintiff to undergo a neuropsychology medical-legal examination in Mississauga. The Plaintiff resided in Ottawa, and objected to the required travel to attend this examination.