Dr. Joseph Regan

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits, claiming he suffered severe psychological injuries following the death of his mother in a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the applicant was not an 'insured person' under s. 3(1) of the Schedule because his psychological issues were pre-existing and not caused by the accident.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had significant pre-existing psychological impairments, including major depression, and failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that these conditions were caused or aggravated by his mother's death.

The Tribunal gave little weight to the applicant's s. 25 psychological assessment because it relied on inaccurate self-reporting and the assessors did not review pre-accident records.

The application was dismissed, along with claims for interest, a special award, and costs.

The appellant appealed her conviction for fraud over $5,000, alleging that her guilty plea was uninformed and involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel.

The appellant suffered from a permanent intellectual development disorder with an IQ of 42, spoke limited English, and could not read or write in English or Tamil.

Her counsel met with her primarily in the presence of her father and a Tamil interpreter, and advised her to plead guilty.

The appellant did not understand the implications of the plea, particularly the impact of the restitution order on her future social assistance eligibility.

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was not informed of the consequences of her guilty plea, constituting a miscarriage of justice.

The conviction was set aside and a new trial was ordered, but the court exercised its discretion to enter a stay of proceedings in the interests of justice, considering the appellant's intellectual disability, financial hardship, and personal progress.