The defendant insurer brought a cross-motion for a declaration that Ontario law applied to the assessment of damages in an underinsured motorist claim arising from a motor vehicle accident in Nevada.
The defendant relied on an agreement reached at a pre-trial conference where plaintiffs' counsel conceded Ontario law applied.
The plaintiffs sought to withdraw this admission, arguing it was based on a mistake of law regarding the interpretation of the OPCF-44R Endorsement and ignorance of binding appellate jurisprudence.
The court dismissed the defendant's motion, allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw the admission as there was no consensus ad idem and enforcing the agreement would cause significant prejudice to the plaintiffs.
