Dr. Scott Garner

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Director's Delegate, which overturned an Arbitrator's finding that he suffered a catastrophic impairment as a result of a 2013 motor vehicle accident.

The applicant had previously been involved in two accidents in 2002.

The Director's Delegate found that the applicant was already catastrophically impaired before the 2013 accident and that the Arbitrator erred by applying the material contribution test instead of the 'but for' test.

The Divisional Court granted the judicial review, finding the Director's Delegate's decision unreasonable because it relied on an unestablished fact that the applicant was already catastrophically impaired.

The Court also held that the Arbitrator's use of the material contribution test was appropriate in circumstances involving multiple accidents where it is impossible to determine which accident caused the impairment.

Following a jury trial for a motor vehicle accident where the plaintiff pedestrian was awarded damages less than the defendant's Rule 49 offer to settle, the court determined the costs payable.

The plaintiff was awarded costs up to the date of the offer, and the defendant was awarded costs thereafter.

The court reduced the defendant's costs due to a late concession on liability and the improper testimony of the defendant's expert witness, resulting in a net costs award payable to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision when the defendant driver failed to yield the right-of-way at an intersection.

The plaintiff suffered a mild traumatic brain injury, depression, and chronic pain, which substantially interfered with her employment and daily life.

The court found the defendant driver fully liable and his employer vicariously liable.

The court held that the plaintiff's injuries met the statutory threshold for non-pecuniary damages and awarded $100,000 in general damages, $50,000 for loss of competitive advantage, and $45,000 in Family Law Act damages.

The court also discharged the jury due to inflammatory opening statements by defence counsel.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for a determination of catastrophic impairment.

The insurer's Designated Assessment Centre concluded she did not suffer a catastrophic impairment.

The arbitrator found that the applicant suffered a marked impairment in social functioning due to the accident, satisfying the definition of catastrophic impairment under section 2(1)(g) of the Schedule.

The arbitrator also assessed her physical impairments at 52% WPI, which combined with her psychological impairment would exceed the 55% threshold.

The applicant was awarded her expenses of the arbitration.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement and housekeeping benefits, which the insurer terminated.

The arbitrator found that the accident materially contributed to the applicant's development of chronic pain syndrome, rendering her completely unable to engage in any employment for which she was reasonably suited.

The arbitrator awarded ongoing income replacement benefits and a closed period of housekeeping benefits, along with interest.

The claim for a special award was dismissed, as the insurer's actions, while mistaken, were not unreasonable given the complex medical history.

The applicant, who was involved in multiple motor vehicle accidents, brought a cross-application for an interim order compelling the insurer to pay past medical and rehabilitation expenses and ongoing treatment and medication costs pending a final arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator dismissed the request for past expenses, finding no urgency and deferring the complex claims to the imminent full hearing.

Regarding ongoing treatment, the arbitrator held that the proposed treatments had not been mediated as required by section 281(2) of the Insurance Act and directed the parties to mediation.

However, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay for the applicant's psychiatric and pain management medications pending the final order, as medication had been included in a prior mediation.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits.

The insurer terminated her weekly caregiver benefits after 104 weeks, asserting she did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The applicant argued she suffered a substantial inability to engage in her pre-accident caregiving activities for her adult son, who had a severe brain injury.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's physical limitations, including osteoarthritis and restricted mobility, prevented her from meaningfully engaging in her pre-accident caregiving activities.

The arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay ongoing weekly caregiver benefits and interest, but denied the claim for a special award.