John P. Desjardins

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to income replacement benefits (IRBs) and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and pre-existing conditions.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's pre-accident role as a religious school organizer was administrative and his soft tissue injuries did not cause a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks, denying the IRB claim.

Furthermore, the Tribunal held that the applicant failed to prove a pre-existing condition or chronic pain syndrome with functional impairment that would warrant removal from the MIG.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was limited to the $3,500 MIG treatment cap.

The applicant's representatives brought a motion to withdraw as solicitors of record in a statutory accident benefits dispute.

The representatives demonstrated that they had made numerous unsuccessful attempts to contact the applicant and had been unable to obtain instructions for the upcoming preliminary issue hearing.

The arbitrator found that there had been a complete breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship and granted the motion to withdraw.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following an alleged motor vehicle accident.

The matter proceeded to a preliminary issue hearing to determine whether the incident constituted an 'accident' under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The applicant's legal representatives withdrew from the record on the day of the hearing, and the applicant failed to appear.

The arbitrator dismissed the application due to the applicant's failure to attend and prove his case.

The applicant was ordered to pay $1,500 in expenses to the insurer.

The applicants brought a motion to remove the insurer's counsel of record, arguing that a lawyer at the firm participated in preparing the report to the insurer's denial committee and acted as a claims investigator, thereby creating a conflict of interest and making the lawyer a potential witness.

The arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding insufficient evidence of a conflict of interest or personal financial benefit.

The arbitrator held that the lawyer's actions were consistent with the duties of a solicitor in a typical accident benefits matter and that solicitor-client privilege protected the communications.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After his representative withdrew from the record, the applicant failed to attend the rescheduled arbitration hearing.

As the applicant bore the burden of proof and presented no evidence, the arbitrator dismissed the application.

The applicants sought statutory accident benefits from the insurer following a motor vehicle accident.

The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation and applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.

At the teleconference hearing, counsel for both parties advised that they had agreed to a dismissal of the applications for arbitration without costs.

The arbitrator dismissed the applications on consent and ordered no costs or expenses.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits from the insurer.

At the scheduled arbitration hearing, the applicant failed to attend, and his counsel successfully moved to be removed from the record due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship.

The hearing was adjourned, and the applicant was notified but failed to respond or attend the rescheduled hearing.

The insurer moved to dismiss the application.

The arbitrator granted the motion, dismissing the application for arbitration due to the applicant's failure to attend and pursue the claim, and awarded the insurer $2,000 in expenses.

The applicants claimed accident benefits following a motor vehicle collision.

The insurer denied the claims on the basis that the collision arose from the applicants' intentional and wilful acts.

The applicants failed to attend a scheduled pre-hearing and did not file any submissions in response to the insurer's motion to dismiss.

The arbitrator found that the applicants failed to meet their onus of proof and abandoned their claims.

The applications for arbitration were dismissed, and each applicant was ordered to pay $4,181.34 in expenses to the insurer.

The applicant claimed statutory accident benefits following an alleged motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the claim on the basis that the accident was staged and therefore did not meet the definition of an 'accident' under section 2(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

A preliminary issue hearing was scheduled to determine this issue.

Neither the applicant nor his representative attended the hearing.

Pursuant to Rule 37.7 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, the arbitrator proceeded in the applicant's absence.

Without any evidence from the applicant to prove an accident occurred, the arbitrator dismissed the arbitration and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses.

The insurer was entirely successful in an arbitration regarding the applicant's claim for weekly caregiver benefits.

The insurer sought its expenses of the arbitration proceeding under the Expense Regulation.

The arbitrator found that the insurer's complete success entitled it to its reasonable expenses.

Applying a 2:1 ratio for preparation to hearing time and allowing for one counsel, the arbitrator awarded the insurer $5,600.00 for fees and $1,350.00 for disbursements, for a total of $6,950.00 inclusive of HST.

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

At a preliminary hearing, the applicant, who was unrepresented, requested that her application be dismissed without an award of expenses as she could not afford to pursue the claim.

The arbitrator dismissed the application and the insurer subsequently sought $14,628 in expenses across four related files.

The arbitrator found the insurer's claimed amount to be excessive given the matter was dismissed at the preliminary stage.

The arbitrator awarded the insurer reasonable expenses fixed at $700 per applicant.

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

At the preliminary issues hearing, the applicant, who was unrepresented, requested that his application be dismissed without an award of expenses as he could not afford to pursue the claim.

The insurer sought $14,628 in total expenses across four related dismissed claims.

The arbitrator found that the insurer was entitled to reasonable expenses because the applicant failed to pursue his claim.

However, the arbitrator deemed the requested amount excessive given the matter was dismissed at the preliminary stage.

The arbitrator fixed the insurer's expenses at $700.

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

Her application for arbitration was dismissed at the preliminary hearing stage after she and her family members requested their applications be dismissed.

The insurer sought $14,628 in total expenses for the four related dismissed claims.

The arbitrator found the insurer's requested amount excessive given the claims were dismissed at the preliminary stage and the applicants were unrepresented and impecunious.

The arbitrator awarded the insurer $700 in expenses per applicant.

The applicant's claim for statutory accident benefits was previously dismissed after he abandoned the claim.

The insurer sought $14,628.00 in total expenses for this and three other related dismissed claims.

The applicant, who was unrepresented and impecunious, did not pursue the claim.

The arbitrator found the insurer's requested amount excessive given the matter was dismissed at the preliminary hearing stage.

The arbitrator ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses fixed at $700.00.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for weekly caregiver benefits, claiming he was the primary caregiver for his two young children.

The insurer denied the claim.

At arbitration, the evidence showed that while the applicant was an involved father, he worked full-time in a limousine business, whereas his wife was a full-time homemaker who handled the majority of day-to-day childcare tasks.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant's wife, not the applicant, was the primary caregiver at the time of the accident.

As caregiver benefits are only available to the primary caregiver, the application was dismissed.

The Applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After failing to attend two scheduled pre-hearings and a motion hearing without explanation, the Insurer brought a motion to dismiss the application.

The arbitrator dismissed the Application for Arbitration due to the Applicant's failure to participate in the dispute resolution process and failure to provide evidence supporting his claims.

The Applicant was ordered to pay the Insurer's expenses fixed at $1,500.

The appellant insurer appealed an interlocutory order adding it as a Statutory Third Party rather than as an intervenor under Rule 13.01 in an action arising from an allegedly staged motor vehicle accident.

The insurer argued that as a Statutory Third Party, it could not take a position contrary to its insured, preventing it from fully contesting liability based on fraud.

The Superior Court allowed the appeal, finding that the insurer should be added as a party Defendant to avoid a multiplicity of proceedings and to allow it to properly defend against the alleged fraud.

The appellant appealed an Arbitrator's award of arbitration expenses.

The appellant argued the Arbitrator erred by applying a low ratio of preparation to hearing time for legal fees and by reducing the cost of expert reports by 50% because they were also used in a tort proceeding.

The Director's Delegate dismissed the appeal regarding legal fees, finding the actual ratio applied was generous and within the Arbitrator's discretion.

However, the appeal regarding expert reports was allowed, as the legislation does not permit reducing expenses based on potential recovery in another proceeding.

The appellant was awarded the full amount claimed for expert reports and disbursements.

The appellant appealed an Arbitrator's decision denying a special award under s. 282(10) of the Insurance Act.

The insurer had denied accident benefits based on an engineering report and suspicions of a staged accident, partly due to the common ethnicity of the individuals involved.

The Director's Delegate found that the Arbitrator erred in law by failing to provide adequate reasons for concluding that the insurer reasonably relied on the engineering report, especially after the expert's testimony undermined the report's conclusions.

The appeal was allowed and the issue of the special award was returned to arbitration.

The applicant sought arbitration expenses following a successful claim for statutory accident benefits.

The insurer argued for a reduction in the hourly rate and the number of hours claimed, and objected to full reimbursement of expert reports because they were also being used in an ongoing tort proceeding.

The arbitrator allowed the maximum hourly rate of $150, reduced the claimed hours using a broad approach rather than a line-by-line analysis, and allowed 50% of the cost of the expert reports.

The applicant was awarded a total of $30,001.31 in arbitration expenses.