In this case, the original LAT decision denied the applicant’s motion to add the issue of punitive damages in the amount of $150,000.00. On reconsideration, Adjudicator Mazerolle again denied the applicant’s request…
LAT Tag Archives
2021: Another Year of the LAT (and it isn’t getting faster)
As we bid farewell to 2021, OTLA has updated the Licence Appeal Tribunal statistics from our ongoing Freedom of Information requests. 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…
Tipping v. Coseco Insurance Company, 2021 ONSC 5295 (Div. Ct.)
In this case, the Applicant sought judicial review of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision and reconsideration barring him from proceeding with an appeal to the LAT due to his failure to attend insurer examinations for catastrophic impairment. The issue before the Divisional Court was whether the Applicant could proceed to judicial review given he had not exhausted his right to appeal…
A.J. v. Security National Insurance Co., 2021 CarswellOnt 6104
The Applicant was injured on or about May 27, 2016, and sought benefits pursuant to O. Reg. 34/10 effective September 1, 2010. The Respondent, Security National Insurance refused to pay for specific benefits, including an award pursuant to Regulation 664, interest, and costs…
Ahmed v. Aviva Insurance Company
In the recent case of Ahmed v. Aviva Insurance Company, Aviva Insurance Company proceeded with a motion to dismiss an application as abandoned, despite previous counsel’s death and the applicant’s personal barriers, and was found by Vice Chair Maedel to have acted in bad faith. In the result, the motion was dismissed and Aviva was ordered to pay costs to the applicant…
Fratarcangeli v. North Blenheim
On June 15, 2021, the Divisional Court released its long-awaited decision on three appeals, which all related to whether the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) has the jurisdiction to extend the two year limitation period for disputing accident benefits claims under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. The LAT had been releasing inconsistent decisions as to whether it had this jurisdiction, and clarity was required from the appeal court…
