Alexander Curry

The appellant appealed an Arbitrator's decision denying his claim for $62,877.65 for the construction of a residential aqua therapy pool as a medical or rehabilitation benefit following a motor vehicle accident.

The Director's Delegate upheld the Arbitrator's finding that the home pool was not a reasonable and necessary expense, as the appellant had access to a public pool that met his temporary treatment needs and had shown improvement with its use.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a decision dismissing her human rights application for failing to rectify deficiencies.

The request was filed past the 30-day deadline.

The Tribunal granted an extension of time, noting the applicant had recently retained a representative and acted diligently thereafter.

The Tribunal also granted the reconsideration request, finding that the applicant's previous lack of legal representation and difficulties understanding the process outweighed the public interest in finality, especially since the application had not been heard on its merits.

The applicant sought expenses following a mixed-success arbitration decision regarding statutory accident benefits.

The arbitrator found that success was divided on the issues that proceeded to hearing, which would normally result in each party bearing their own expenses.

However, because the applicant withdrew several claims two days before the hearing, putting the insurer to unnecessary expense, the arbitrator ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's 'costs thrown away' fixed at $400.00.

Following a decision denying the applicant's claims for statutory accident benefits, the arbitrator considered the issue of expenses.

The insurer sought its expenses based on its complete success and negative credibility findings against the applicant.

The applicant argued that lack of success does not automatically result in an expense award and noted the novel issues regarding causation and disability involving three separate accidents.

The arbitrator found that while the insurer was successful and credibility was an issue, the novelty of the issues required a decision.

The arbitrator ordered each party to bear its own expenses.

Following the dismissal of the applicant's claim for statutory accident benefits, the insurer sought its expenses for the arbitration.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's claims were completely unmeritorious and that he was entirely unsuccessful.

Applying the criteria under the Expense Regulation, the arbitrator awarded the insurer its expenses, fixed at $5,000 plus GST, noting that the insurer had kept an unmeritorious preliminary issue alive for strategic purposes.

The insurer sought an order for expenses following an arbitration hearing regarding statutory accident benefits, arguing that it was substantially successful and therefore entitled to its expenses.

The insured person argued that the parties should bear their own expenses given her limited means and mixed success.

The arbitrator rejected a 'winner take all' approach to expenses under the Statutory Accident Benefits scheme, noting it is consumer protection legislation.

Because the insured person raised a legitimate issue and achieved some limited success, the arbitrator ordered that each party bear their own expenses.