Alexander Mazin

The applicant's representative brought a motion to withdraw as counsel in a statutory accident benefits arbitration.

The representative submitted that the applicant was incarcerated and unreachable, resulting in a complete breakdown of the solicitor-client relationship.

The arbitrator granted the motion, finding that the representative had complied with the requirements of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code and that the inability to reach the applicant justified the withdrawal.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for medical and non-earner benefits.

The insurer refused to pay for medical benefits because the applicant failed to attend insurer's examinations to determine if her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline, and argued this precluded her from mediating the refusal.

The insurer also refused to pay a non-earner benefit, arguing she did not apply for it.

The arbitrator held that the insurer's notices did not comply with the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, so the applicant was not precluded from mediating her medical benefits claim.

The arbitrator also found the applicant was not precluded from pursuing her non-earner benefit claim, as her initial application and disability certificate triggered the insurer's obligation to determine continuing entitlement.

The insurer was ordered to pay the claimed treatment expenses.

The applicant failed to attend a preliminary issue hearing regarding whether she was involved in a motor vehicle accident.

Her counsel appeared to request removal from the record due to a loss of communication, noting that the applicant had failed to complete settlement documents and her contact numbers were disconnected.

The arbitrator granted counsel's request to be removed.

The insurer requested that the arbitration be dismissed with expenses.

Given the applicant's failure to attend or communicate, the arbitrator dismissed the application for arbitration and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses fixed at $1,500.

The applicant's representative brought a motion to be removed as solicitor of record in a statutory accident benefits dispute.

The representative provided evidence of a complete breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, noting that the applicant had failed to respond to numerous letters and telephone calls and had failed to attend scheduled pre-hearings.

The arbitrator found that the representative had complied with the requirements of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code and granted the motion to withdraw.

The appellant insurers sought to stay 15 individual arbitrations pending the resolution of a Superior Court action and FSCO charges alleging systemic fraud by the clinics providing the respondents' assessments and treatments.

The Arbitrator dismissed the stay motions, applying the RJR-MacDonald test for interlocutory injunctions.

On appeal, the insurers argued the Arbitrator should have applied the less stringent Armstrong criteria and erred in finding no irreparable harm.

The Director's Delegate dismissed the appeal, holding that the Armstrong criteria apply only to appellate stays under s. 283(6) of the Insurance Act, not to first-instance stays.

The Delegate found no error in the Arbitrator's application of RJR-MacDonald, noting the public interest in a timely and efficient dispute resolution system outweighed the insurers' desire to avoid duplicating evidence across multiple arbitrations.

Following a preliminary issue hearing where the insurer successfully proved fraud and was awarded expenses, the parties could not agree on the quantum.

The arbitrator assessed the insurer's costs, applying a 2:1 ratio for preparation to hearing time and capping the insurer's counsel's hourly rate at the Legal Aid rate of $96.95 per hour pursuant to Rule 78 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator awarded the insurer $3,456.23 in total expenses, inclusive of fees, disbursements, and GST, while disallowing the $3,000 assessment fee.

The insurer brought a motion to stay the arbitration until the applicant attended an examination under oath pursuant to section 33(1.1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The arbitrator found that while section 33 provides a remedy for non-compliance (potential disentitlement to benefits), it does not grant the arbitrator authority to stay the arbitration proceedings.

The arbitrator distinguished this from a failure to attend a section 42 medical examination, where a stay may be granted to prevent unfairness or abuse of process.

The motion for a stay was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while driving his estranged wife's vehicle.

The insurer denied statutory accident benefits, arguing under s. 30(1)(a) of the Schedule that the applicant ought reasonably to have known the vehicle was uninsured.

The arbitrator found that the insurer failed to meet its evidentiary burden to show that an ordinary, rational person in the applicant's situation would have known the vehicle lacked insurance.

The preliminary issue was resolved in favour of the applicant.