3 total
Successful plaintiffs awarded $250,000 in fees and $126,598.48 in disbursements.
Following a four‑week jury trial arising from a motor vehicle collision caused by an impaired driver, the plaintiffs obtained a damages verdict of $220,000 but a much smaller net judgment after statutory deductions and accident benefits offsets.
Both parties sought costs, relying on competing Rule 49 settlement offers and arguments concerning proportionality and the impact of statutory deductibles.
The court held that statutory deductibles are not considered when determining entitlement to costs and rejected the defendant’s argument that its offers were more favourable.
After reviewing the complexity of the trial, expert evidence, motions, and proportionality considerations, the court fixed the plaintiffs’ costs at $250,000 in fees plus $126,598.48 in disbursements and applicable HST.
The court further concluded that recent amendments to the Insurance Act affecting cost calculations should not apply retroactively to this litigation.
Chronic pain and functional limits satisfied statutory threshold for motor vehicle injury claims.
The defendant brought a threshold motion under s. 267.5(5) of the Insurance Act arguing the injured plaintiff had not sustained a permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental, or psychological function following a motor vehicle collision.
Conflicting medical evidence was presented regarding chronic pain, psychiatric impairment, and the causal connection between the collision and the plaintiff’s symptoms.
The court accepted expert evidence linking facet joint injuries and chronic pain to the accident and found the plaintiff’s condition substantially interfered with his ability to perform the heavy physical duties of his construction business.
The court also rejected suggestions that the plaintiff was malingering.
The plaintiff met the statutory threshold for non‑pecuniary damages.
Insurer ordered to pay income replacement benefits and a $10,000 special award for unreasonably withholding payments.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement benefits (IRBs), transportation expenses, and the cost of a medical assessment.
The insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant had returned to work and did not meet the disability tests.
The arbitrator found the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident employment for the first 104 weeks and a complete inability to engage in suitable employment thereafter until she commenced a new career.
The arbitrator awarded the IRBs, transportation expenses, and assessment costs.
Furthermore, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay a $10,000 special award because it unreasonably withheld IRBs by failing to have its accountant review updated financial information that would have revealed flaws in its initial denial.
