3 total
Applicant not excluded from income replacement benefits; reasonably believed he had employer's consent to drive van.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while driving his employer's van.
The insurer denied income replacement benefits, arguing the applicant was excluded under s. 30(1)(d) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule because he knew or ought to have known he was operating the vehicle without the owner's consent.
The arbitrator found the applicant's evidence credible that he reasonably believed he had the consent of the company's retired owner to use the van for a weekend trip to Toronto.
The arbitrator concluded the applicant was not excluded from pursuing his claim for income replacement benefits.
Appeal of jury damages award dismissed; verdict was not plainly unreasonable or unjust.
The appellant appealed a jury verdict assessing her general damages at $35,000 and future loss of income at zero following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.
The appellant argued that questions posed by the jury during deliberations showed they considered irrelevant matters, and sought a new trial or reassessment of damages.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's recharge cured any potential issues with the jury's questions, and that the jury's verdict on damages was not so unreasonable and unjust as to warrant appellate intervention.
Appeal dismissed; insurer bound by settlement agreement to negotiate OHIP's subrogated claim.
Following a motor vehicle accident, the injured party settled her tort claim.
The settlement included an agreement that the defendants' insurer would negotiate OHIP's subrogated claim directly.
When the insurer later refused to pay, OHIP sued.
The trial judge found a binding agreement existed and that the insurer was estopped from raising a limitation defence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the insurer's appeal, finding no palpable error in the trial judge's conclusion that an agreement was reached, and holding that the six-year limitation period did not begin to run until OHIP received notice of the insurer's repudiation of the contract.
