Angela S. James

The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits.

The parties previously entered into a settlement agreement for $3,500, and the Applicant executed a Final Release and Settlement Disclosure Notice.

The Applicant subsequently applied for arbitration for medical and rehabilitation benefits that pre-dated the settlement.

The insurer argued the claims were barred by the settlement.

The arbitrator found that the settlement documentation was clear and unambiguous, and any mistake by the Applicant or his paralegal representative was a unilateral mistake that did not void the agreement.

The Applicant was precluded from proceeding to arbitration.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits.

The insurer terminated the benefits and the applicant applied for arbitration more than two years after the refusal.

The insurer requested a preliminary issues hearing to determine if the application was time-barred.

The applicant argued that the insurer was estopped from relying on the limitation period due to post-mediation settlement negotiations, and alternatively sought relief from forfeiture.

The arbitrator held that the application was out of time, finding no evidence that the insurer promised not to rely on the limitation period.

The arbitrator also held that relief from forfeiture is not available for a missed limitation period.

The claims for income replacement benefits were dismissed.

The applicant sought expenses following his complete success in defending against the insurer's application to vary or revoke an arbitration order regarding income replacement benefits.

The arbitrator found the applicant was entitled to expenses based on his degree of success.

The arbitrator allowed the claimed counsel fee of $150 per hour for 79.7 hours, noting the duplicated preparation time due to an adjournment requested by the insurer and the late narrowing of issues.

However, the arbitrator disallowed the cost of three medical reports obtained before the insurer filed its application, finding they were not incurred in furtherance of the application.

Total expenses of $24,314.82 were awarded to the applicant.

State Farm appealed an arbitrator's refusal to amend a previous order to specify the interest rate, start date, and expenses payable by the respondent following a finding of wilful misrepresentation.

The Director's Delegate found that the arbitrator erred in law by failing to issue an enforceable order regarding interest as required by section 17(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The Delegate also found the arbitrator breached the duty of procedural fairness by failing to provide written reasons for refusing to consider the assessment of expenses.

The matter was remitted to the arbitrator to determine the interest details and the entitlement to an assessment of expenses.

The insurer sought to add a repayment issue to the arbitration.

The applicant's representative refused to consent, claiming the issue was unmeritorious and statute-barred, but provided no evidence or detailed submissions.

The arbitrator found that the insurer's claim was not plainly and obviously devoid of merit and that adding the issue would avoid a multiplicity of proceedings.

The arbitrator allowed the insurer to amend its response to include the repayment issue and ordered the applicant to pay $250 in expenses due to the representative's contumacious refusal to consent.