James Lim

The defendant in a long-term disability action brought a motion for an order requiring the plaintiff to attend a psychiatric Independent Medical Evaluation (IME).

The plaintiff opposed, arguing she had already attended a pre-litigation psychiatric assessment with a different doctor.

The court held that the pre-litigation assessment did not constitute a first examination under section 105 of the Courts of Justice Act, giving the defendant a prima facie right to the requested IME.

Alternatively, the court found sufficient evidence of a change in circumstances to warrant a further examination.

The motion was granted.

The defendant insurer brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for long-term disability benefits on the basis that it was statute-barred.

The plaintiff's benefits were terminated in March 2013, but he did not commence his action until July 2016, arguing that the limitation period was delayed by ongoing appeals and his mental incapacity.

The court found that the termination of benefits created a fully ripened claim, informal appeals did not delay the limitation clock, and the plaintiff failed to prove he lacked the capacity to commence a proceeding.

The motion was granted and the action dismissed.