Ms. Smith

The applicant sought post-104-week income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the benefits based on insurer's examinations concluding the applicant did not suffer a complete inability to engage in suitable employment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to provide sufficient recent medical evidence to rebut the insurer's expert reports and prove a complete inability to work.

Claims for interest and a special award were also dismissed.

Victims of a Ponzi scheme sued the bank used by the fraudster, alleging negligence and knowing assistance in breach of trust for failing to shut down the fraudster's accounts.

The court held that the plaintiffs did not prove their investments were held under an express trust, and the evidence did not establish that the bank had actual knowledge of the fraud or its moral equivalents of wilful blindness or recklessness.

Applying Livent and prior banking-fraud authorities, the court further declined to recognize a novel duty of care owed by a bank to third-party victims based only on constructive knowledge of a customer's fraud.

The action was dismissed in full.

The applicant sought expenses following an arbitration where she had mixed success in claiming statutory accident benefits.

The insurer argued that it enjoyed a greater degree of success and that the applicant unnecessarily prolonged the proceeding by calling six expert witnesses and being tardy in providing medical and financial records.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant's success was mixed, she was forced to proceed with the arbitration to obtain any benefits, as the insurer refused to acknowledge liability until the eve of the hearing.

The arbitrator awarded the applicant her reasonable expenses, with some reductions for unnecessary testimony and excessive preparation time, totaling $20,637.64 inclusive of fees and disbursements.