Ryan Moriarty

The defendant requested an adjournment of a fixed trial date at a case conference, citing outstanding production issues including pre-accident medical notes and employment records.

The plaintiffs opposed the adjournment.

The court dismissed the request, noting that discoveries occurred over a year prior and the defendant had ample time to bring production motions.

The court maintained the fixed trial date, emphasizing that such dates are only adjourned in extenuating circumstances, which were not present.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident when struck as a pedestrian and sought attendant care benefits from the respondent insurer.

The respondent denied the claim, and the applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that her non-professional care provider (her spouse) sustained an economic loss as a result of providing attendant care.

The evidence showed no marked difference between the care provider's pre- and post-accident hours of work and earnings.

The application for attendant care benefits, interest, and an award under Regulation 664 was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits beyond the $3,500 limit prescribed by the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued that his injuries fell outside the MIG due to psychological impairments, chronic pain, and a pre-existing condition.

The adjudicator found the applicant's medical evidence inconsistent, particularly noting the lack of psychological complaints or referrals in his family physician's clinical notes.

The adjudicator concluded that the applicant sustained predominantly minor injuries and was subject to the MIG limit.

The application for further benefits was dismissed, and neither party was awarded costs.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After failing to attend a pre-hearing discussion and two subsequent arbitration hearings, and despite her representative's unsuccessful efforts to locate her, the arbitrator proceeded in her absence.

The application for arbitration was dismissed as the applicant failed to present evidence to support her claims.

The insurer was awarded $300 in expenses.

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada appealed an order requiring the production of an aircraft's cockpit voice recorder (CVR) to NAV Canada in the context of civil litigation arising from an airplane crash.

The Board argued the motion judge applied the wrong legal test under s. 28(6) of the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge correctly balanced the public interest in the proper administration of justice against the statutory privilege attached to the CVR.

The court upheld the production order, noting the CVR's high relevance and reliability, but reversed a minor order regarding a flight animation that was not properly before the motion judge.

The appellant, a non-settling defendant in a class action arising from an aviation accident, appealed an order approving partial settlements.

The appellant argued that the settlement's bar orders, which prohibited further discovery of the settling defendants, would prejudice its defence and prevent the trial court from properly allocating fault.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the bar orders did not prevent the appellant from raising its liability arguments at trial.

The Court also upheld the motion judge's finding that the benefits of the settlement to the class outweighed any remote prejudice to the appellant's procedural rights.