Full Decision Background In N.M. v. C.T., 2026 ONSC 365, the plaintiff brought an action against her former employer for sexual assault, which occurred in the workplace. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded the plaintiff damages in the amount of $137,689. The Plaintiff’s Employment The defendant owned a bar and restaurant and employed the plaintiff as a server. The plaintiff began her employment with …

Full Decision Sarah Khaledi was involved in an automobile collision on July 30, 2022, following which she sought statutory accident benefits from Intact Insurance Company (Intact), her accident benefits (AB) insurer. Intact denied portions of several treatment plans and Khaledi appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) for resolution of the dispute. The matter proceeded on June 23, 2025, before Adjudicator Timothy Porter. Issues in …

Full Decision Bogoroch & Associates LLP, on behalf of the appellant, Flordeliza Marcelo, was successful in the Divisional Court decision of Marcelo v. The Personal Insurance Company, 2026 ONSC 974, on the important issue of whether an intracranial brain contusion falls within the definition of a “minor injury” under Section 3(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). The Divisional Court found that the Licence …

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 …