The appellant insured was receiving disability benefits following an automobile accident.
The respondent insurer suspended benefits after the appellant refused to attend an addiction treatment program recommended by an addiction expert who examined him under the insurance contract.
The appellant brought an application for a declaration that benefits could not be terminated, and the insurer successfully moved for an order for another medical examination by the same expert under s. 105 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 33.
The Divisional Court dismissed the insured's appeal, holding that a medical examination conducted pursuant to an insurance contract prior to litigation does not pre-empt a defendant's prima facie right to a first medical examination under the rules of civil procedure.
