Dr. Gavin Shanks

The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident when the defendant driver ran a red light and t-boned the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger.

The court found the defendants 100% liable.

The plaintiff, a self-employed jewelry designer, suffered a mild traumatic brain injury, chronic pain, PTSD, and post-concussion syndrome.

The court awarded $1,101,568.55 in total damages, including $225,000 for general damages, $328,402.20 for past and future economic loss, and $489,300 for future care costs, plus a management fee and tax gross-up.

Following a reconsideration order, the Licence Appeal Tribunal redetermined the applicant's entitlement to an income replacement benefit (IRB).

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a customer service representative due to chronic pain in her left arm and shoulder.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant and her medical expert over the insurer's experts, noting that the applicant's ongoing pain and functional limitations were consistent with an inability to perform her work tasks.

The applicant was awarded IRBs of $341.96 per week for the disputed period, plus interest.

The appellant insurer appealed the dismissal of its motion for summary judgment.

The insurer argued that the respondent's claim for income replacement benefits was barred by the two-year limitation period under s. 281.1 of the Insurance Act.

The motion judge had found a genuine issue for trial based on an error in a subsequent denial form and a fresh medical finding.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that the initial clear and unequivocal denial triggered the limitation period, and a fresh medical finding could not reactivate it.

Summary judgment was granted dismissing the claim.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits for over two years.

The insurer terminated benefits, arguing his ongoing disability was caused by pre-existing fibromyalgia and psychological issues, not the accident.

The arbitrator found the applicant was completely disabled from suitable employment but concluded that neither party presented reliable evidence on whether the accident caused the disability.

The arbitrator determined that the applicant bore the legal burden of proving causation.

Because the applicant failed to discharge this burden, his claim for ongoing income replacement benefits was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits after suffering a broken neck, claiming he fell out of his van while attempting to sleep in it after a party.

The insurer denied benefits, arguing the injury was not caused by an 'accident' as defined in the Schedule.

The arbitrator found the applicant's evidence unreliable due to his heavy intoxication, inconsistencies in his reporting, and the physical evidence at the scene.

Accepting expert medical and biomechanical evidence, the arbitrator concluded the injury was likely caused by prolonged extreme neck posturing while lying intoxicated on the ground, rather than a fall from the van.

The application for arbitration was dismissed.

The applicant, a child care provider, was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and claimed statutory accident benefits.

The insurer terminated her weekly income replacement benefits on multiple occasions.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and accepted medical evidence that she developed chronic pain syndrome as a result of the accident, rendering her substantially disabled from performing the essential tasks of her employment.

The arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay income replacement benefits for the disputed periods and ongoing.

Additionally, the arbitrator found the insurer acted unreasonably in prematurely terminating benefits and awarded a special award of $3,500, along with interest and arbitration expenses.