3 total
Application for accident benefits dismissed and counsel removed from record after applicant failed to participate.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
After the applicant repeatedly failed to attend scheduled pre-hearing discussions and failed to communicate with her counsel, her counsel brought a motion to be removed from the record.
The insurer concurrently requested that the application for arbitration be dismissed.
The arbitrator granted both motions, removing counsel from the record and dismissing the application without costs under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, finding that the application was frivolous, vexatious, or commenced in bad faith due to the applicant's failure to participate.
Action allowed to proceed despite delay; timetable varied and dismissal refused.
The defendant moved to dismiss a motor vehicle accident action for delay under the Rules of Civil Procedure, relying on the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with a litigation timetable and to set the matter down for trial.
A plaintiff brought a cross‑motion to vary the timetable order previously imposed when the action was reinstated after an administrative dismissal.
The court held that the earlier reinstatement order effectively displaced reliance on the six‑month set‑down requirement and that dismissal for delay was not warranted.
While most of the delay was attributable to the plaintiffs, including missed deadlines and discovery delays partly arising from conflict-of-interest issues among plaintiffs, the court emphasized the preference for resolving civil actions on their merits.
The timetable order was varied and the action permitted to proceed, subject to the defendant’s ability to raise prejudice at trial arising from incomplete medical records.
Application for accident benefits dismissed as frivolous or vexatious due to applicant's failure to pursue claims.
The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
After mediation failed, the applicant applied for arbitration.
The applicant and her counsel failed to attend the pre-hearing conference and subsequently failed to respond to the arbitrator's directions or communicate an intention to pursue the claim.
The insurer moved to dismiss the application.
The arbitrator found that the applicant manifested no interest in pursuing the claims and dismissed the application as frivolous or vexatious under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.
