David Cutler

The respondent, Tarion Warranty Corporation, brought a motion to add the builder as a party to the appellant's warranty claim appeal.

The builder argued it had a significant interest due to reputational and financial risks, including potential indemnification claims.

The Tribunal denied the motion, finding that the builder's substantive rights would not be impeded by the decision and that adding the builder would unnecessarily complicate the consumer protection proceeding.

The builder's request for costs was also dismissed as it was not a party and the appellant's conduct was not unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith.

The applicant sought a determination of catastrophic impairment based on a mental and behavioural disorder (Criterion 8) following a 2019 motor vehicle accident.

The applicant relied on the opinions of an ABI specialist and an orthopaedic surgeon, neither of whom performed formal catastrophic impairment testing.

The respondent presented surveillance evidence showing the applicant performing activities of daily living unassisted, contradicting her self-reports, and a psychiatric assessment concluding she suffered only moderate impairments.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet her burden of proving a catastrophic impairment, noting inconsistencies in her reporting and the lack of qualified psychological or psychiatric assessments supporting her claim.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for occupational therapy, an optometry assessment, and a gym membership.

The respondent insurer denied the benefits.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had proven on a balance of probabilities that the claimed treatment plans and assessments were reasonable and necessary to treat her concussion and psychological symptoms.

The Tribunal placed less weight on the insurer's examination reports.

The applicant was awarded the claimed benefits and interest, but her claim for an award was dismissed.

The respondent's request for costs was also dismissed.