6 total
Minor settlement approved and funds ordered paid to father residing in China to avoid administrative delays.
The plaintiffs sought court approval for the settlement of claims on behalf of two minor plaintiffs arising from a fatal motorcoach bus collision.
The court approved the settlement amounts, the proposed solicitor-client account based on quantum meruit, and the payment of the net settlement funds to the minor plaintiffs' father, who resides in China, rather than the Accountant of the Superior Court of Justice.
The main action and all crossclaims were dismissed without costs.
Settlement and fund management plan approved for foreign resident plaintiffs under disability following bus crash.
The plaintiffs, who were passengers on a tour bus that crashed on Highway 401, sought court approval for the settlement of claims on behalf of two parties under disability: an elderly woman who suffered a severe traumatic brain injury and a minor child.
The plaintiffs also sought approval of the solicitor-client accounts, disbursements, and a proposal to have the net settlement funds managed by family members in China, where the plaintiffs reside.
The court found the settlements, legal fees, and proposed fund management plans to be reasonable and in the best interests of the parties under disability, and granted the requested relief.
Minor's settlement and funds management approved; action dismissed without costs.
This motion arose from one of six related actions following a fatal motorcoach bus collision on Highway 401 in June 2018, in which the deceased was a passenger.
The plaintiffs sought: an order to continue the action on behalf of a plaintiff who died after the action was commenced; approval of the settlement of the claims of a minor plaintiff (the deceased's granddaughter); approval of the minor plaintiff's contribution toward the solicitor-client account; and approval of the management of the net settlement funds payable to the minor plaintiff by her father, who resides in China, rather than through the Accountant for the Superior Court of Justice.
The court granted all relief requested, finding that the settlement was reasonable and in the minor's best interests, that payment to the father was proportionate and practical given the parties' residence in China, and that counsel's dual role as affiant and lawyer of record was appropriate in the circumstances.
The court dispensed with the requirement for litigation guardians residing in China to file supporting affidavits due to legal and logistical barriers.
The court dispensed with the requirement for litigation guardians residing in China to file affidavits in support of court approval motions for settlements involving parties under disability, due to legal and logistical barriers under Chinese law.
The decision reviews the collaborative resolution of liability and settlement issues following a major motor coach accident, the apportionment of limited insurance funds, and the purpose of the court approval process under Ontario law.
The court found that requiring affidavits would be disproportionate and unnecessary, and that the interests of justice are served by waiving the requirement.
The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to approve the pro-rata apportionment of a $5 million USD insurance settlement among multiple plaintiffs following a fatal motor coach collision.
This decision concerns the approval of a pro-rata apportionment of insurance proceeds, legal fees, and disbursements among multiple plaintiffs in six related actions arising from a 2018 motor coach collision in Ontario involving Chinese tourists.
The court reviews the collaborative process among counsel, the narrowing of liability to two defendants, and the reasonableness of the proposed settlement distribution.
The court also addresses its jurisdiction to grant the requested relief, the sufficiency of evidence supporting the motion, and the process for future motions involving parties under disability.
Master's order allowing non-lawyer to represent corporate plaintiff set aside due to complexity of claims.
The defendants brought a motion to set aside a Master's Order that granted leave for the plaintiff corporation's president, a non-lawyer, to represent it in the action.
The court found it had jurisdiction to set aside the order because one defendant received inadequate notice of the original motion and new facts had arisen.
Applying the test for non-lawyer representation of a corporation, the court concluded the non-lawyer was not reasonably capable of comprehending the complex legal issues involved in the litigation, which included copyright, trademark, and defamation claims.
The court revoked the leave and ordered the plaintiff to appoint a lawyer.