Dr. Jerry Cooper

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a determination of catastrophic impairment, attendant care benefits, and various medical and assessment expenses.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the claim for attendant care benefits was statute-barred as it was filed beyond the two-year limitation period, and declined to extend the time.

The Tribunal also concluded that the applicant failed to prove she suffered a catastrophic impairment, preferring the respondent's expert evidence over the applicant's.

Consequently, the claims for housekeeping benefits, chiropractic treatment, and a chronic pain assessment were all dismissed.

The Applicant sought Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs) and medical/rehabilitation expenses following a 2012 motor vehicle accident.

The Arbitrator found that the Applicant did not meet the test for pre-104 week IRBs (substantial inability to perform essential tasks of employment) or post-104 week IRBs (complete inability to engage in suitable employment), noting she had returned to work for a period, completed nursing programs, and cared for four children.

Claims for the cost of a Disability Certificate and a Psycho-Vocational Assessment were also dismissed for failing to meet the statutory requirements for reasonableness and necessity.

The application was dismissed in its entirety.

The applicant, a former TTC bus driver, sought judicial review of a decision by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board denying his claim for lost income following his retirement.

The Board had awarded him partial wage loss for a period prior to his retirement, finding that a workplace assault exacerbated his psychological issues, but denied wage loss post-retirement based on a WSIB report concluding his issues were unrelated to the assault.

The Divisional Court quashed the Board's decision, finding it unreasonable because the Board reached contradictory conclusions on causation without adequate explanation and improperly relied on selective quotes from a WSIB decision rather than the actual medical evidence before it.

The defendant pleaded guilty to eight counts of giving contradictory evidence in relation to his testimony at various court proceedings in a second-degree murder case involving the death of a two-and-a-half-year-old child.

The defendant's testimony evolved significantly across multiple hearings, from denying knowledge of the child's injuries to eventually admitting responsibility.

The court imposed a sentence of three years imprisonment, emphasizing the serious nature of misleading evidence in homicide proceedings and the need for general deterrence and denunciation.