Michael Hanton

The plaintiff was catastrophically injured when she lost control of her vehicle on a snow-covered and icy municipal road, crossing the centre line and colliding with an oncoming vehicle.

The plaintiff sued the municipality for failing to keep the road in a reasonable state of repair.

The Superior Court of Justice found that the municipality was in the midst of a winter weather event but failed to adequately treat the road, leaving it unplowed and subject to refreezing for several hours.

The court held that the road was in a state of non-repair, which caused the collision, and that the municipality failed to establish any statutory defences under the Municipal Act.

The plaintiff was found not to be contributorily negligent, and the municipality was held fully liable for the agreed-upon damages.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to optometry services, prescription eyewear, and physiotherapy for a rotator cuff tear.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal denied the claims for optometry services and eyewear, finding insufficient evidence that the applicant's pre-existing vision issues were exacerbated by the accident.

However, the Tribunal granted the claim for physiotherapy, finding that the rotator cuff tear was caused by the accident and that the applicant was not required to exhaust OHIP-funded physiotherapy before seeking accident benefits.

Interest was awarded on the overdue physiotherapy benefits.

The defendants brought a motion to compel the plaintiff to answer questions and provide documents refused at discovery, primarily relating to a prior 1999 motor vehicle accident.

The plaintiff opposed, arguing the prior records were irrelevant.

The court ordered the plaintiff to produce the requested statement of claim, employment details, medical records, and medical/legal reports, finding them relevant to potential thin-skull or crumbling-skull issues.

The court also ordered the defendants to produce cell phone records and inquire about surveillance as requested by the plaintiff.