On a winter night, 18-year-old Melinda Wasylyk was driving home from her first night of nursing college when she lost control of her vehicle twice on CR88 – one of the busiest roads in Simcoe County (“Simcoe”) connecting Hwy 400 to Bradford.
The plaintiff, Breanne Pridmore, was severely injured riding as a passenger on an all-terrain vehicle (“ATV”) driven by her friend, Tyler Drenth, in March 2014. They were riding along the shoulder of Bird Road, a rural highway road, when she was thrown from the ATV. She suffered complete paraplegia.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision of Derenzis v. Gore Mutual Insurance Company, September 18, 2023 (unreported) raises the question of whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to grant a civil remedy, in particular injunctive relief, and whether adjudicative privilege and deliberative secrecy attach to certain documents internally produced at the LAT. Applicant’s counsel filed affidavit evidence of a whistle blower from the LAT that addressed institutional issues of alleged bias and adjudicative interference.
Here’s what I said on a previous LAT stat blog:
“Not surprising, the LAT is not getting any faster. And, even more not surprising, the same insurers are still creating a lot of LAT disputes.”
That is still true.
As usual, here are some quick “take aways” before the actual stats:
This case involves a plaintiff who claimed personal injury damages after witnessing a very serious collision and its aftermath. The plaintiff happened to stand outside his aunt’s home when two cars collided and he
Ilaz Osmani and Fakete Osmani, the plaintiffs were involved in a motor vehicle collision (MVC). They claimed damages for injuries they allegedly sustained from the incident. After a nine-day jury trial, the verdict was that the subject MVC did not cause or contribute to any ongoing pain and impairments suffered by the plaintiffs.
