Eric R. Levin

Following an arbitration where the insurer successfully argued that the applicant's impairments fell within the Minor Injury Guideline, both parties sought their expenses of the proceeding.

The arbitrator awarded expenses to the insurer, noting its complete success on the issues in dispute and its reasonable offers to settle made well before the hearing.

The arbitrator rejected the applicant's arguments that the insurer engaged in sharp practice or that novel issues were raised.

The insurer's claimed costs were reduced to reflect a more reasonable preparation-to-hearing time ratio and to comply with the maximum allowable disbursements for expert witnesses and travel under the Expense Regulation.

The insurer was awarded $10,928.92 inclusive of HST and disbursements.

The plaintiff sought substantial indemnity costs following the dismissal of the defendant's motion for summary judgment.

The court found that the defendant's motion was reasonably brought and did not warrant substantial indemnity costs under Rule 20.06.

The court awarded partial indemnity costs, allowing the plaintiff's counsel's travel disbursements but reducing the fee element for travel time to one-third.

Costs were fixed at $8,500.

The defendant driver moved for summary judgment dismissing a personal injury action arising from a pedestrian knock-down collision.

The moving party argued that liability could be determined on the written record without a mini‑trial.

The court held that material credibility conflicts between the plaintiff, the defendant, and an independent witness created genuine issues requiring oral testimony.

Given the conflicting evidence, the statutory burden on drivers in pedestrian collisions under the Highway Traffic Act, and the existence of a jury notice, the court concluded that summary judgment or a mini‑trial would not be proportionate.

The motion was dismissed and the action allowed to proceed to trial.