3 total
Motion to strike jury notice due to COVID-19 delays dismissed as premature.
The plaintiff brought a motion to strike the jury notice in a motor vehicle accident action, arguing that civil jury trials would be unavailable for the foreseeable future due to the COVID-19 pandemic and that a jury would not represent a cross-section of the community.
The court dismissed the motion, adopting a 'wait and see' approach to allow the newly implemented Central East Region protocol for civil trials to evolve.
The court found no evidence that jury composition had deteriorated and held that striking the jury based on anticipated delay was premature.
Summary judgment denied; genuine issue for trial exists regarding broker's advice on motorcycle insurance coverage.
The defendants, Economical Insurance Group and Perth Insurance Company, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.
The core dispute was whether the plaintiff's newly acquired motorcycle was covered under his existing auto policy, which the defendants argued was voided because the plaintiff owned another uninsured, allegedly inoperable vehicle.
The court dismissed the motion, finding a genuine issue for trial regarding what the plaintiff's insurance broker told him about coverage.
The court declined to order a mini-trial, concluding it would not be in the interests of justice to hear the broker's evidence piecemeal.
Insurer cannot initiate court action to dispute catastrophic impairment; Insurance Act forms complete dispute resolution code.
The insured was injured in a motor vehicle accident and was determined by a Designated Assessment Centre to have suffered a catastrophic impairment.
The insurer disputed this finding, initiated mediation, and after mediation failed, commenced a court action for a declaration that the insured was not catastrophically impaired.
The motion judge struck the insurer's claim, finding that the Insurance Act provides a complete code for dispute resolution that does not permit an insurer to initiate a court proceeding.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the insurer's appeal, confirming that the statutory scheme requires the insured to initiate court or arbitration proceedings to enforce a disputed catastrophic impairment finding, while protecting the insurer by allowing it to pay only its last settlement offer pending resolution.