Dr. Cox

In a joint cross-border insolvency trial concerning the allocation of approximately $7.3 billion in lockbox funds from the sale of global business lines and residual intellectual property, the court interpreted the Master R&D Agreement as an operating transfer-pricing document that granted limited licence rights but did not govern post-insolvency allocation.

The court rejected both the position that one Canadian debtor owned all sale proceeds by virtue of legal title and the position that the EMEA debtors jointly owned all intellectual property by operation of law.

Applying unjust enrichment principles and the broad remedial jurisdiction available in CCAA proceedings, the court held that a just result required a pro rata allocation among debtor estates based on allowed claims.

The court further directed that duplicate claims be counted only once for allocation purposes, that intercompany claims be included, and that interim distribution proposals be brought forward.

The applicant, a former registered practical nurse, sought judicial review of a decision by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal denying her benefits for interstitial lung disease.

She claimed the illness was caused by workplace exposure to viruses.

The Tribunal, relying on an independent medical assessor, found it probable that the disease was idiopathic and only speculative that it was caused by workplace viruses.

The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review and dismissed the application, finding the Tribunal's reliance on the medical assessor was reasonable and did not constitute an abdication of its decision-making power.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed statutory accident benefits, including income replacement, rehabilitation, housekeeping, and dependant care benefits.

The insurer terminated benefits based on a disability DAC assessment by a chiropractor.

The arbitrator found that the applicant suffered from a severe TMJ disorder, chronic pain, and depression, rendering her substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a travel consultant.

The arbitrator awarded the claimed benefits and ordered the insurer to pay a $30,000 special award for unreasonably withholding benefits, noting the insurer's reliance on an assessor lacking expertise in TMJ disorders and its failure to re-evaluate its position in light of overwhelming medical evidence.