Catherine A. Temple

The plaintiff property owner sought declarations that her building was originally constructed as two semi-detached units or, alternatively, that she was entitled to four residential units based on a legal non-conforming use.

The municipality had placed a stop-work order on her renovations.

Relying on expert architectural and engineering evidence, the court found the building was originally constructed in 1906 as a single-family dwelling with internal access between areas.

The court also found no evidence that the building ever contained four residential units prior to the 1977 zoning by-laws.

The requested declarations were dismissed.

The deceased was killed in a motor vehicle accident.

At the time, she was separated from her husband but not divorced, and they had executed a separation agreement releasing all claims.

Her dependent daughters claimed a supplementary death benefit under the SABS, which the insurer denied on the basis that the separated husband remained a 'spouse' entitled to the primary benefit.

The arbitrator awarded the benefit to the daughters and ordered a special award against the insurer.

On appeal, the Director's Delegate confirmed the death benefit award, finding the separation agreement precluded the husband's claim, but revoked the special award because the insurer's position was based on a reasonable interpretation of a novel legal issue.

The applicants, dependent daughters of the deceased, claimed the full death benefit under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer paid a portion to the deceased's separated spouse, despite a separation agreement releasing all spousal claims.

The arbitrator found that the separated spouse had waived his right to the benefit, entitling the daughters to the remaining amount.

The arbitrator also ordered the insurer to pay a maximum 50% special award, finding that the insurer acted unreasonably and in bad faith by ignoring binding case law and failing to properly investigate the claim.