ontario Tag Archives

Huber v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, 2024 CanLII 41012 (ON LAT)

Huber v. Allstate (“Huber”) involved an accident benefits dispute before the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “LAT”) related to a motor vehicle collision, which occurred on November 6, 2019. The issues in dispute were: (a) whether the applicant suffered a “minor injury,” in accordance with section 3 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (the “SABS”); (b) whether the applicant was entitled to psychological services in the amount of $3,841.09; and (c) whether the applicant was entitled to psychological assessment in the amount of $2,486. Additionally, the applicant further sought interest and an award under section 10 of O. Reg 664 due to the insurer unreasonably withholding or delaying payment to the applicant.

Veerasingam v. Licence Appeal Tribunal, 2024 ONSC 3730

Full Decision The Ontario Divisional Court reminds legal professionals of their professional obligations with respect to advocacy. The single most important task of the litigator is to marshal and present the facts by admissible evidence to prove their case. Lawyers must never knowingly misstate facts. A lawyer must not assert as true a fact that cannot reasonably be supported by the evidence admitted in the …

Crete v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation, 2024 ONCA 459

The recent Court of Appeal decision in Crete v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation confirmed that the landlord was not liable for damages caused by a slip and fall on ice in a townhouse complex in an area used exclusively by individual tenants, where the lease required the tenant to clear snow and ice.

H.C. v. SSQ Life Insurance Company Inc., 2024 ONSC 53 (CanLII)

In this long-term disability matter H.C., Justice Doyle ruled that the plaintiff was not required to produce the redacted notes and records of her long-time treating psychologist. The Court also granted the plaintiff’s cross-motion for anonymization of the parties’ names as well as a sealing order of the psychologist’s treating records. The case sets out the general principles on redactions of records as well as the Wigmore criteria, and that such redactions be allowed if the information is not relevant to the matter and there is no good reason to produce it.

S.K. v. Aviva Insurance Canada, 2020 CanLII 94803 (ON LAT)

In this decision, the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) confirms that, in accordance with the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) Superintendent’s Guideline No. 01/18 and Bulletin A-03/18, the hourly rates set out in the Form 1 are only meant to be used for the purposes of calculating monthly entitlement, and the maximum hourly rates are not to strictly apply as the maximum payable for attendant care services.

Neary v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONSC 2510 (CanLII)

This decision illuminates several considerations for lawyers regarding the strategic use of Requests to Admit (RTA). Firstly, the court indicates that RTAs should be employed judiciously, adding significant value to the case without being overly repetitive and should aim to clarify the issues at dispute throughout the various stages of the litigation. Secondly, the court notes that if response deadlines for RTAs are missed, one must successfully plead inadvertence to withdraw the admission, according to Rule 51.05 . The court also reaffirms the criteria for withdrawing admissions under this rule.