Gianmarco Fabiano

The applicant sought Non-Earner Benefits (NEBs) following a motor vehicle accident, claiming a complete inability to carry on a normal life due to physical and psychological impairments.

The respondent insurer denied the claim.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's impairments did not continuously prevent her from engaging in substantially all of her pre-accident activities, relying on surveillance evidence showing her performing various daily tasks and the opinions of the respondent's assessors who examined her during the relevant period.

The Tribunal gave little weight to the applicant's occupational therapist's report because it was prepared long after the accident and following a second motor vehicle accident.

The application for NEBs, an award, and interest was dismissed.

Following the dismissal of the plaintiff's action, the successful defendants sought costs.

The defendants had made offers to settle that the plaintiff did not accept, and the judgment reflected that the defendants achieved what they offered.

The court awarded costs on a substantial indemnity scale pursuant to Rule 49 and section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act, noting that the plaintiff's claim was specious and an inappropriate use of the litigation process.

The plaintiff was ordered to pay costs of $33,362.34 to one defendant and $24,712.82 to the others.

The appellants appealed a motion judge's decision regarding a fee-sharing agreement between two law firms.

The appellants raised three issues: (1) the calculation of net fees under the agreement; (2) the imposition of liability on the corporate appellant based on a constructive trust; and (3) the costs award.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's findings on all three issues, dismissing the appeal with costs awarded to the respondent.

The plaintiff law firm, Srebrolow Lebowitz Spadafora PC (SLS), brought a motion for summary judgment against its former associate, Paul Wilkins, and his new firm, PW Lawyers Professional Corporation, regarding unpaid fees from client files transferred upon Wilkins' departure.

The dispute centered on whether certain referral fees paid by Wilkins to a third-party lawyer and a paralegal (who was an SLS employee at the time of referral) could reduce the net fees owed to SLS under their separation agreement.

The court found that the referral fee paid to the third-party lawyer was reasonable, but the fee paid to the paralegal was compensation, not a true referral fee, and thus not deductible.

The court also found PW Lawyers Professional Corporation liable by way of constructive trust for the funds owed to SLS.