P. Omeziri

The appellant appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision denying his request for a catastrophic impairment designation, income replacement benefits, and physiotherapy following a motor vehicle accident.

The appellant argued the Vice-Chair erred by failing to include a contingency for future surgery in his whole person impairment rating and by ignoring expert evidence.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, confirming that whole person impairment is assessed based on the claimant's condition at the time of the hearing without contingencies for future deterioration or surgery.

The plaintiff moved for a status hearing under Rule 48.14(5) to extend the set down deadline in an action regarding alleged construction defects in a custom home.

Only one defendant opposed the motion.

The Master found that the plaintiff provided an acceptable explanation for the litigation delay, noting that much of it was due to accommodating the defendants' requests.

The Master also found no evidence of non-compensable prejudice to the defendants.

The motion was granted, and a timetable was set for the remaining interlocutory steps.

Following a substantive arbitration decision awarding the applicant certain medical and rehabilitation benefits, the parties disputed when the insurer was required to pay the ordered benefits, when interest began to accrue, and the quantum of the applicant's legal expenses.

The Arbitrator held that the insurer must pay deemed incurred expenses immediately upon receipt of the arbitral award, and that interest starts to accrue on the 31st day after receipt of the valid application for the benefit.

The Arbitrator also awarded the applicant his reasonable expenses for the arbitration fixed at $81,919.84.

The defendant, the lead driver in a three-car rear-end collision, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's claim against her.

The court reviewed the competing versions of the accident and found that under any scenario, the moving party was rear-ended after stopping for a turning vehicle.

Applying the presumption of fault for following vehicles, the court found no evidence of negligence by the moving party.

The motion was granted, the claim against the moving party was dismissed, and costs of $17,000 were awarded.