Katy Commisso

The appellant appealed an order finding him in contempt and dismissing his action for persistently refusing to attend court-ordered medical examinations in Toronto.

The appellant argued the motion judge erred by not treating contempt as a last resort and by failing to accept his legitimate excuse for non-compliance.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the motion judge's decision to find the appellant in contempt and to dismiss the action, emphasizing the appellant's deliberate non-compliance and the futility of further opportunities to comply.

The insurer appealed a trial judgment that awarded the insured household and attendant care expenses for a pre-judgment period, regardless of whether they were actually incurred.

The Court of Appeal found the trial judge erred by not applying the statutory definition of "incurred" under s. 3(7)(e) of the SABS-2010 and by misapprehending evidence regarding the insurer's delay in assessing benefits for the purpose of deeming expenses under s. 3(8).

The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the relevant parts of the trial judgment, and ordered a new trial on the issue of whether the insurer unreasonably withheld or delayed payments.

The defendants, Man-Shield (NWO) Construction Inc. and Manshield (NWO) Construction, Inc., brought an application to stay multiple construction lien actions in favour of arbitration.

The subcontractors and owners opposed the stay.

The court dismissed the application, finding that Man-Shield had unduly delayed in seeking the stay, as measured from the date the statements of claim were issued.

The court also found Man-Shield estopped by its conduct and that granting a stay would create more uncertainty and delay, rather than facilitate resolution.