Alim Ramji

The applicant was struck by a minivan and sought statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy, an in-home assessment, and an orthopaedic assessment.

The respondent initially denied the treatment plans with defective notices under s. 38(8) of the Schedule, but later provided proper notice with IE reports.

The Tribunal found that none of the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary, relying on the applicant's family doctor's records and the respondent's IE physician.

However, because of the initially defective notice, the respondent was ordered to pay for any physiotherapy costs incurred between the 11th business day after the plan was submitted and the date proper notice was given.

The claims for the assessments and a special award were dismissed.

The defendant Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) brought a motion to transfer the action from the Central West Region (Brampton) to the Toronto Region.

The plaintiff, Magdalene Coppin, opposed the transfer.

The court, applying Rule 13.1.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, found that the incident occurred in Toronto, the plaintiff resided and received treatment in Toronto, and examinations for discovery took place in Toronto.

The only connection to Brampton was the location of the plaintiff's counsel.

The court determined that the TTC met its onus to demonstrate that the interests of justice required the transfer to Toronto, considering a holistic application of the factors under Rule 13.1.02(2)(b).

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that found his chronic pain syndrome was a 'minor injury' subject to the $3,500 monetary cap under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The Executive Chair granted the reconsideration, finding that the Tribunal erred in its statutory interpretation.

Applying the modern approach to statutory interpretation, the Executive Chair concluded that chronic pain is not included in the definition of 'minor injury' or 'clinically associated sequelae', and that the minor injury framework's 12-week treatment program is incompatible with chronic pain.

The applicant was awarded the previously denied medical benefits.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for arbitration regarding accident benefits.

The applicant's legal representatives brought a motion to withdraw due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, as they had been unable to reach the applicant for several months.

The applicant failed to attend the hearing despite receiving notice.

The arbitrator granted the motion to withdraw, dismissed the application for arbitration due to the applicant's failure to participate and prove his claims, and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses fixed at $1,000.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing regarding her claim for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

Her legal representative requested to be removed from the record due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, which the arbitrator granted.

As the applicant did not appear and presented no evidence to support her claims, the application for arbitration was dismissed.

The insurer was awarded $1,000 in expenses due to the applicant's repeated failure to attend proceedings and examinations.

The tenant appealed a decision of the Landlord and Tenant Board allowing the corporate landlord to terminate the tenancy for the occupation of the sole shareholder's mother.

The tenant argued the reasons were inadequate and that a corporate landlord could not rely on s. 48(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act for this purpose.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the reasons adequate and confirming that the definition of 'landlord' includes the sole shareholder of a corporate landlord, permitting eviction for the shareholder's parent.