Plaintiff’s Appeal From Unsuccessful Motion To Add Defendants 6 Years After Collision Statute-Barred: A Review Of Limitation Periods
Case Summaries Category Archives
Watts v. Bowman, 2016 ONSC 3994 (CanLII)
In order to determine whether a driver of a vehicle has the implied consent of the owner of the vehicle to drive it, the court has to ascertain what he or she actually did under the circumstances, not what he or she would have done under different circumstances. The court cannot speculate on whether or not an owner would consent to allow a vehicle to be driven if the driver had requested the permission.
Mamado v. Fridson, 2016 ONSC 4080 (CanLII)
At the conclusion of trial, the defendant brought a threshold motion and called two expert witnesses in support of the motion: Dr. Soric and Dr. Reznek. The Court found that the evidence from both witnesses contained serious flaws and expressed concern regarding how the majority of their income was derived from conducting medical-legal work for defendants. The motion was denied.
Watts v. Bowman, 2016 ONSC 3994
Watts is an illustrative case dealing with implied consent. Watts restates the current test for whether implied consent has been granted.
Thompson v. Intact Insurance Company, 2016 CanLII 60729 (ON LAT)
Released August 16, 2016 | Full Decision [CanLII] This is one of the first AABS decisions from the LAT. The applicant brought an AABS application to determine entitlement to a denied treatment plan. Prior to the hearing, Intact agreed to fund the treatment plan. Despite the settlement, the applicant sought to recoup its costs of preparing for the hearing. The LAT was forced to decide …
Babcock v. Destefano, 2016 ONSC 5352
Defendant’s Motion for DMEs Dismissed, while also Chastised for Not Taking Pre-Trial Preparations Seriously