Ms. Sinclair

The plaintiff, an elderly resident, sued the defendant retirement home after a slip and fall on an uneven sidewalk.

Following a jury trial, the defendant was found not liable.

The defendant, represented by in-house counsel for its insurer, sought costs.

The court declined to award costs to the successful defendant, noting the insurer's "hardball" tactics, refusal to negotiate, and the broader social interest of access to justice for modest litigants facing large insurers.

The applicant was injured in a bicycle-motorcycle collision and sought various statutory accident benefits, including a determination of catastrophic impairment (CAT).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a marked impairment in the adaptation domain resulting from psychological and behavioural disorders.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's claims for post-104 week income replacement benefits, finding he did not suffer a complete inability to work.

Claims for attendant care and housekeeping benefits were also dismissed because the applicant failed to prove his father, the service provider, suffered an economic loss.

A claim for a special award was denied as the insurer did not unreasonably withhold benefits.