Kevin Lasko

The defendants, Turgut Askar and Beck Taxi Ltd., brought a motion to change the trial venue from Barrie to Toronto.

The plaintiff, Leela Rampersad, opposed the motion.

The court granted the defendants' motion, finding that Toronto was a "substantially better" venue given the location of the motor vehicle accident, the residences of the parties and most potential witnesses, and the plaintiff's connections to Toronto for employment and medical treatment.

The only connection to Barrie was the location of the plaintiff's counsel.

The plaintiff was injured while exiting a taxi and sued her insurer for unidentified automobile coverage after failing to identify the driver.

The insurer brought a motion for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff did not take reasonable steps to identify the driver and failed to provide proper notice.

The court granted the motion, finding that the driver's identity could have been ascertained with reasonable diligence through the taxi dispatch company's records, meaning the vehicle did not qualify as an 'unidentified automobile' under the policy.

The plaintiffs were injured in a motor vehicle accident and sued the at-fault driver.

When the defendant's insurer took an off-coverage position, the plaintiffs' counsel attempted to add the plaintiffs' own insurer to the action for underinsured coverage.

After a motion judge directed counsel to bring the motion on notice due to a potential limitation period issue, counsel instead commenced a new action against the insurer.

The motion judge in the new action struck the claim as an abuse of process.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that while ignoring the direction was a minor abuse of process, striking the claim and potentially depriving the plaintiffs of underinsured coverage was a disproportionate penalty.

The court instead penalized the plaintiffs by denying them the costs of the motion and the appeal.