Full Decision Jurisdictional Limits Clarified: The LAT Cannot Compel EUO Attendance Full Decision In Fang Fei Ning v. Security National Insurance Company (LAT File No. 25-012036/AABS), the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) has clarified an increasingly litigated issue: whether it has jurisdiction to compel attendance at an Examination Under Oath (EUO) under s. 33 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). Background Context Following a case …

Full Decision Background The plaintiff (Aylmer Meat Packers) hired a lawyer to represent it on a contingency fee basis. The terms of the agreement were such that the lawyer would be paid only if they won at trial or if there was a settlement. The lawyer, at Harrison Pensa LLP, represented the plaintiff through an 18-day trial. The plaintiff lost at trial – see Aylmer …

Full Decision In a recent reconsideration decision from the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT), the applicant secured a significant partial victory following the LAT’s decision released on November 6, 2025. After being denied attendant care benefits and multiple treatment plans, the applicant sought reconsideration under Rule 18.2 of the License Appeal Tribunal Rules (Rules). On February 13, 2026, Craig Mazerolle, Vice Chair at the LAT, released …

Full Decision The Court of Appeal’s decision in Kotsopoulos appears, at first glance, to be a routine municipal liability appeal. It is not. It is a procedural recalibration. The judgment reinforces that partial summary judgment is not merely a tactical device. It is an exception to the structural integrity of the trial process and courts must guard that integrity carefully. The Procedural Posture The plaintiff …

Full Decision Facts Mr. Bahinipaty, a self-represented plaintiff and former doctor and lawyer, alleged that the defendant doctors deliberately, intentionally, and fraudulently misdiagnosed him with terminal brain cancer during his attendance at Vancouver General Hospital in early 2016. He asserted that the defendants treated him for a brain tumor when he actually suffered from a stroke, which resulted in an unnecessary craniotomy. The plaintiff made …

Full Decision In Bello v. Hamilton (City), the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed the limited scope of a statutory defence. The defence, set out in s. 44(8) of the Municipal Act, is one that municipalities rely upon to avoid liability for injuries that occur in areas adjacent to highways. The Court of Appeal held that if the public commonly and habitually uses an area adjacent …