Darrell March

The applicant sought an assessment of her arbitration expenses following a previous decision awarding her 70 percent of her expenses.

The insurer refused to pay the claimed amount of $6,038.61, arguing it was excessive and that the applicant had rejected a settlement offer.

The arbitrator found the insurer's settlement offer did not comply with the Settlement Regulation.

Applying a 1:1 ratio for preparation to hearing time, the arbitrator awarded the applicant $4,840 plus GST for legal fees and disbursements, including $200 for the assessment proceeding.

At a pre-hearing discussion for a statutory accident benefits dispute, the insurer sought an order requiring the applicant to serve all expert reports at least 90 days prior to the arbitration hearing, rather than the 30 days required by Rule 39 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator declined to make the order, noting that increasing the notice period would delay hearings, increase motions for relief, and undermine the principle of expeditiousness.

The parties were ordered to comply with the standard 30-day notice period under Rule 39, though they were encouraged to voluntarily exchange documents earlier.

The applicant withdrew his arbitration application for statutory accident benefits after commencing a court action.

The insurer brought a motion seeking to dismiss the arbitration, prohibit the applicant from commencing future FSCO arbitrations, and recover its $1,500 in expenses and $3,000 assessment fee, arguing the proceeding was frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

The arbitrator dismissed the insurer's motion, finding no evidence that the claim was trivial, commenced in bad faith, or pursued for an improper purpose.

The arbitrator also found the requested prohibition order overly broad and noted that the statutory provision allowing an award for the assessment fee had been repealed.

Each party was ordered to bear its own expenses.

Following an arbitration decision awarding the applicant income replacement and medical benefits, both parties sought their arbitration expenses.

The arbitrator awarded expenses to the applicant, finding he was entirely successful and that the insurer's counsel and representative caused undue delays through fruitless cross-examination and uncooperative behaviour.

The applicant's claimed costs of over $39,000 were reduced to $20,000 due to excessive hours billed, lack of complexity, and the applicant's own contribution to some delays.

The insurer's claim for expenses was dismissed.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The applicant failed to attend the arbitration hearing and had a history of failing to communicate with counsel or comply with production orders.

The arbitrator dismissed the arbitration due to the applicant's failure to meet the burden of proof.

The applicant was ordered to pay $500 in expenses to the insurer.

The applicant, who was injured in a 1991 motor vehicle accident, brought a motion seeking reinstatement of income replacement benefits.

He argued that the insurer improperly terminated his benefits by failing to comply with the notice requirements under sections 37 and 49 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (Bill 59).

The arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding that the applicant's claims arose under the Bill 68 Schedule, which was in effect at the time of the accident.

As Bill 68 did not contain the procedural requirements found in Bill 59, the insurer was not required to follow them when terminating the benefits.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits, including income replacement and medical benefits.

The insurer denied the claims, arguing the applicant did not have a legitimate contract of employment and was not substantially disabled.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had a valid employment contract as a van driver/delivery person and that his accident-related injuries substantially disabled him from performing the heavy lifting and repetitive movements required for the job.

The arbitrator awarded income replacement benefits, medical benefits, and the cost of a disability certificate.

Furthermore, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay a $15,000 special award, finding that the insurer had unreasonably delayed and withheld benefit payments by failing to properly investigate the employment contract and by ignoring procedural notice requirements.

The appellant appealed an arbitration order finding that he had validly settled his claim for statutory accident benefits.

The appellant argued that under the Settlement Regulation, a settlement is not finalized until the insured confirms it after receiving the disclosure notice, and the two-day cooling-off period runs from that point.

The Director of Arbitrations rejected this 'three-step approach', holding that if the parties agree on all terms, the insurer fulfills its obligations by sending the required notice.

Unless the insured rescinds within two business days of receiving the notice, the settlement is binding.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant was previously ordered to pay the insurer's expenses after her application for arbitration was dismissed as abandoned.

The insurer submitted a bill of expenses for $7,696.28, which included a $3,000 assessment fee already ordered to be paid and counsel fees billed at twice the permitted legal aid rate.

The arbitrator found the bill of expenses to be non-compliant with the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, lacking supporting evidence, and containing frivolous and vexatious claims.

Rather than requiring further proceedings, the arbitrator fixed the insurer's expenses at $750, representing three hours of hearing time at legal aid rates plus necessary disbursements and preparation time.

The applicant sought production of the insurer's entire accident benefits file, including post-mediation documents and communications with counsel, arguing the insurer waived privilege by abandoning its position on an insurer examination.

The arbitrator found no factual basis for waiver of solicitor-client privilege.

However, due to concerns about the insurer's compliance with a prior production order and its refusal to particularize claims of privilege, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to serve a detailed Affidavit of Documents for both the pre-mediation and post-mediation periods.

The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits, including housekeeping.

The Insurer scheduled an insurer's examination (IE) for the housekeeping claim, which the Applicant failed to attend.

The Insurer argued the Applicant was precluded from proceeding to arbitration on all issues under section 50 of the Schedule.

The Arbitrator held that the exclusion under section 50 would only apply to the housekeeping claim, not all claims.

Furthermore, the Arbitrator found the Insurer's notice of the IE was fatally flawed because it failed to clearly set out the consequences of non-attendance and the Insurer failed to make reasonable efforts to schedule the examination at a convenient time.

Therefore, the Applicant was not precluded from proceeding to arbitration on any issues.

The insurer brought a motion seeking an order sanctioning the applicant for her refusal to attend a proposed insurer's medical examination on the eve of the arbitration hearing.

The insurer argued that a late medical report from the applicant's family physician created exceptional circumstances justifying a last-minute examination.

The arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding that the insurer had ample notice of the issues and that scheduling an examination at this late date constituted tactical brinkmanship.

The applicant was permitted to proceed to arbitration, and the insurer was ordered to pay $250 in fixed costs.

The applicant claimed she was injured in a bus rollover accident in New York and sought income replacement benefits, medical expenses, and clothing expenses from her insurer.

The insurer denied the benefits.

At arbitration, the arbitrator found that while an accident likely occurred, the medical evidence did not establish that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a chambermaid.

Claims for taxi, motel, and clothing expenses were also dismissed for lack of evidence.

The insurer's late argument that the applicant was disentitled for failing to provide information was rejected.

The insurer was ordered to pay 70% of the applicant's arbitration expenses due to the applicant advancing legitimate claims, reduced because of late production of her arbitration brief.

The applicant claimed statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident and applied for arbitration after mediation failed.

The applicant and her representatives failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing, failed to comply with undertakings, and failed to serve documents.

The arbitrator dismissed the application as abandoned.

Finding that the applicant commenced the arbitration with no intention of proceeding, which constituted an abuse of process designed to pressure the insurer into settlement, the arbitrator ordered the applicant to pay the insurer $3,000 under section 282(11.2) of the Insurance Act, plus the insurer's expenses thrown away.

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

The parties reached an oral settlement agreement, and the insurer forwarded the settlement documents and a release.

The applicant reconsidered and did not sign the release.

The insurer argued the claim was settled on a full and final basis.

The arbitrator found that the settlement was enforceable because the insurer complied with the Settlement Regulation by forwarding the disclosure and release, and the applicant failed to deliver a written notice of rescission within the two-day cooling-off period.

The applicant was precluded from proceeding to arbitration.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for arbitration after a dispute over weekly income benefits.

He subsequently disappeared, failing to attend the pre-hearing or the hearing, and failing to comply with production orders.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had constructively withdrawn his application and that his conduct amounted to an abuse of process.

The application was stayed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the insurer's $2,000 assessment fee and $500 in expenses.

The insurer appealed an arbitration order that allowed the insured to withdraw his application for arbitration shortly before the hearing date without ordering him to pay an assessment for abuse of process.

The Director's Delegate dismissed the appeal, finding that the arbitrator properly exercised his discretion in allowing the withdrawal and correctly concluded that the insured's conduct did not amount to an abuse of process.

The applicant sought to withdraw his application for arbitration regarding statutory accident benefits one month before the scheduled hearing, intending to proceed in court instead.

The insurer objected, arguing the withdrawal was an abuse of process and seeking costs under the Insurance Act and Practice Code.

The arbitrator found the applicant had not acted for an improper purpose or to harass the insurer, and therefore the withdrawal was not an abuse of process.

The withdrawal was permitted on the condition that the applicant could not re-apply for arbitration on the same issues.

The applicant's request for expenses of the withdrawal hearing was denied.