David Sazant

The plaintiff in a motor vehicle action sought an order that the insurer pay the full costs of a mediation, arguing that section 258.6(1) of the Insurance Act, which mandates the insurer to pay full costs when the plaintiff requests mediation, prevails over Rule 24.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires equal sharing of mediator costs for mandatory mediations in Toronto actions.

The court found a conflict between the two statutory provisions and held that the Insurance Act prevails by virtue of Rule 1.02, which states that the Rules do not apply if a statute provides for a different procedure.

The motion was granted, and the plaintiff's costs for the motion were fixed.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of her actions by the trial judge.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge did not have a complete picture of the facts and circumstances when dismissing the case.

The appellant, a self-represented litigant with language issues, was non-compliant with a trial management order at the time set for trial, and her main liability witness (her brother) had been recently injured and hospitalized in Ecuador.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeals, set aside the trial judge's orders, and directed the appellant to bring a motion within 60 days before a Superior Court judge to demonstrate why the matters should proceed, on a more fulsome record including medical evidence.