Margaret (Rita) Gratsias

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's action arising from a trip and fall over a black cable in a gym weight room.

The court found numerous conflicting factual issues regarding the location of employees, the visibility of the cable, and whether a liability waiver was brought to the plaintiff's attention.

Concluding that a fair and just determination could not be made on the documentary record, the court declined to use its expanded fact-finding powers and dismissed the motion, awarding costs to the plaintiff.

The applicant sought Non-Earner Benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming a complete inability to carry on a normal life due to physical and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that surveillance evidence showing the applicant shopping and lifting items contradicted her reported limitations.

The Tribunal also noted the applicant's pre-existing end-stage renal failure and an intervening accident as complicating factors.

Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's procedural objections, finding no breach of her s. 14 Charter right to an interpreter and no denial of natural justice regarding the refusal to hear closing arguments.

The appellant infant, through her litigation guardian, appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision denying her attendant care benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The appellant claimed that a motor vehicle accident caused her premature birth, which in turn caused her to suffer from gastroesophageal reflux disease requiring attendant care.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Adjudicator's factual determination that the infant did not require attendant care beyond normal parental duties was supported by the evidence and determinative of the claim, rendering the legal issues regarding causation moot.

The Applicant sought a non-earner benefit following a motor vehicle accident.

At the commencement of the arbitration hearing, the Applicant requested to withdraw from the proceeding.

The Insurer agreed to the withdrawal but sought its expenses, citing the Applicant's delay in productions and a meritless preliminary issue.

The Arbitrator permitted the withdrawal and awarded the Insurer $6,000 in expenses, finding that the Insurer was successful in having the claim withdrawn and was entitled to reasonable costs, though the amount claimed was reduced due to excessive hours and the Insurer's own missteps.

The applicants sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle collision.

The insurer denied further claims and sought repayment of benefits already paid, alleging that the collision was staged and the applicants wilfully misrepresented material facts.

At a preliminary issue hearing, the arbitrator found the applicants to be credible and concluded that any inconsistencies in their evidence were due to the ordinary fragility of memory rather than a conspiracy.

The arbitrator held that the applicants did not wilfully misrepresent material facts and dismissed the insurer's claims for repayment.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while riding his bicycle.

He applied for accident benefits, initially electing a non-earner benefit, but later claimed entitlement to an income replacement benefit.

The arbitrator found that the applicant failed to prove he had a reasonable explanation for delaying his re-election.

Furthermore, the applicant did not meet the eligibility criteria for an income replacement benefit, as he was not employed for at least 26 weeks in the 52 weeks prior to the accident and was not receiving employment insurance benefits at the time of the accident.

The arbitrator also concluded that the applicant did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment.

The claims for an income replacement benefit and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits after an incident on a TTC bus where he engaged in a physical altercation with another passenger, fell, and allegedly injured his toe, which later led to a leg amputation.

The insurer denied the claim on the basis that the incident was not an 'accident' under section 2(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The arbitrator found that the incident was an assault, not an accident, as the bus merely provided the location for the fight and was not moving at the time.

Furthermore, the assault was an intervening act that broke the chain of causation, and the applicant failed to establish a causal link between the bus incident and his subsequent amputation.

The preliminary issue was resolved in favour of the insurer.

In a dispute over statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, the insurer sought a pre-hearing production order for the applicant's 2006 and 2007 income tax returns.

The applicant claimed caregiver benefits, alleging he was the primary caregiver for his children.

The arbitrator found that the tax returns, specifically the child care expense deductions, were directly relevant to the caregiver claim.

The applicant was ordered to produce the requested tax returns.