Dr. Comper

The plaintiff was awarded over $1.1 million in damages following a personal injury trial.

The parties appeared before the court to determine the costs of the trial and the calculation of a management fee.

The court found that the plaintiff had made reasonable offers to settle that were more favourable than the judgment, entitling her to elevated costs.

The court awarded the plaintiff $852,528.03 in costs and disbursements, and fixed the management fee at $125,000 based on an annualized sliding scale rather than a fixed percentage.

The applicant was seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident and subsequently gave birth to a child.

An arbitrator awarded her nanny expenses as a rehabilitation benefit under s. 15(5)(l) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, finding as a fact that the expenses were rehabilitative.

The Director's Delegate set aside the award, holding that child care expenses could only be claimed as caregiver benefits under s. 13.

On judicial review, the Divisional Court held that the Director's Delegate's decision was patently unreasonable and incorrect in law.

The court restored the arbitrator's decision, confirming that child care expenses can be recovered as a rehabilitation benefit if they are factually found to be rehabilitative for the insured.

The applicant, a self-employed aluminum installer, suffered a shoulder separation in a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer paid income replacement benefits for 104 weeks and then assessed his loss of earning capacity at zero.

At arbitration, the arbitrator determined the applicant's pre-accident earning capacity by estimating his cash income, which was not reported on his tax returns.

The arbitrator found the applicant's residual earning capacity to be nil, rejecting the insurer's proposed alternative occupations because they did not suit the applicant's personal and vocational characteristics, including his age, limited English skills, and preference for independent, non-routine work.

The applicant was awarded a weekly loss of earning capacity benefit of $251.45.

The applicant was severely traumatized in a motor vehicle accident and received extensive psychological treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.

The insurer terminated payments for the treatments, arguing they were no longer reasonable in frequency or duration.

The arbitrator found that while ongoing psychotherapy was appropriate, the frequency of two to three visits per week over several years was excessive.

The insurer was ordered to pay 50 per cent of the outstanding accounts.

Additionally, the arbitrator granted a special award of $2,500 because the insurer violated the 'pay pending dispute' provision by withholding payments while the dispute was ongoing.