Full Decision The plaintiff, Carmen Ranger (“Ranger”), brought an action pursuant to the Occupiers’ Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.2 (“OLA”) for damages she sustained from a slip and fall accident that occurred on January 29, 2013. The defendants named in the action included CPP Investment Real Estate Holdings Inc. (“CPP”), who was the owner of the property, Triovest Realty Advisors (“Triovest”), who was the …
Full Decision In October 2013, the 27-year-old patient attended the emergency department at the Sault Area Hospital by ambulance and was treated by the defendant emergency physician. The working diagnosis was intoxication and the patient was discharged home. The following morning, the patient reported feeling fine to her parents. When her parents returned home from work, they found her in a significantly worse condition and …
Full Decision Background In Pye v. Di Trapani et. el., 2024 ONSC 2265, the plaintiff was awarded one million dollars in a personal injury action. Notably, the amount awarded by the jury exceeded both the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s offers to settle. In this decision, Skarica J. outlined the legal principles regarding costs, offers to settle, pre- and post-judgment interest and indemnity. Held Total costs …
Full Decision This Ottawa summary judgment decision again highlights that lack of expert evidence may be fatal to a medical malpractice case. Ms. Abdul-Hussein, the self-represented plaintiff in this matter, sued Dr. Werner Zabel, an ophthalmologist. Ms. Abdul-Hussein alleged he had performed a cataract surgery and laser capsulotomy negligently and failed to obtain her informed consent. She framed her claim as one of battery and …
Full Decision On November 21, 2023, the plaintiffs brought a motion for an order striking the statement of defence due to the defendant’s failure to serve a sworn and complete affidavit of documents and to attend examination for discovery. Alternatively, the plaintiffs sought an order compelling the delivery of the affidavit of documents and the defendant’s attendance for examination. The defendant brought a cross-motion for …
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.
