This case stemmed from a motor vehicle collision in 2010. Three denial letters with respect to Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs) and housekeeping benefits were sent to the insured throughout 2011 but no dispute resolution forms were attached to the last two denials. As part of the FSCO process, the insured applied for mediation which concluded by January 2014 giving the insured an extension of 90 days following the mediator’s report.
Case Summaries Category Archives
Van Belois v. Bartholomew, 2023 ONSC 5799 (CanLII)
The plaintiff successfully resisted a motion to compel her to attend a further defence medical examination after the deadline to serve expert reports had passed.
Moustakis v. Agbuya, voir dire heard October 17, 2023 in the Ont SCJ
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.
Penate v. Martoglio, 2024 ONCA 166 (CanLII)
This case serves as a refresher from the Ontario Court of Appeal on what constitutes adequate reasons and the implications of discharging a jury without them. As occurred here, a new trial may be ordered where it is not inevitable that the jury would arrive at the same conclusion as the trial judge did.
DC v. TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, 2023 CanLII 77319 (ON LAT)
The applicant in this case, DC, was involved in a motor vehicle collision on September 20, 2019. DC was 12 years old at the time. As a result of the collision, DC suffered a traumatic brain injury resulting in catastrophic impairment. The dispute before the LAT was whether the respondent, TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, was required to pay DC a non-earner benefit. At the time of the LAT hearing, DC was 15 years old.
Shahin v. Intact Insurance Company, 2024 ONSC 2059 (CanLII)
The Divisional Court allowed an appeal from a decision of the LAT, finding that the Tribunal’s decision was procedurally unfair