Michael J. L. White

The appellant appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision finding he was not an 'insured person' under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) and that the respondent insurer was not required to assign a claim number.

The appellant's policy with the respondent had lapsed prior to the motor vehicle accident.

The appellant argued that anyone involved in an accident in Ontario has SABS coverage and that the respondent was required to pay benefits pending a priority dispute.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's interpretation that 'a particular motor vehicle liability policy' refers to a specific policy, not a generic one.

The court also rejected the appellant's procedural fairness arguments regarding page limits and adjudicator expertise.

The respondent insurer requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that awarded the applicant medical benefits for social work counselling and physiotherapy.

The insurer argued the Tribunal erred by disregarding the applicant's Examination Under Oath testimony and by overriding a previous Tribunal decision finding the applicant had reached maximal medical recovery.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the reconsideration request, finding that while the original adjudicator did not fully explain why she discounted the applicant's testimony, her reliance on the medical evidence provided sufficient rationale.

The Vice-Chair also found no error in the adjudicator's assessment of the physiotherapy plan, noting adjudicators are not bound by previous decisions and the adjudicator properly relied on the in-person medical examinations.

This decision addresses a costs endorsement following the dismissal of the plaintiff's motion to strike a jury notice as premature.

The parties had initially agreed to partial indemnity costs for the motion, but the defendant, having successfully opposed the motion, sought substantial indemnity costs.

The court considered the defendant's offers to settle, noting they did not trigger Rule 49 consequences.

Despite the defendant's success, the court declined to award substantial indemnity costs, finding the plaintiff's refusal of the offers was not unreasonable given the rapidly evolving legal landscape concerning jury trials during the COVID-19 pandemic and the defendant's shifting position.

Partial indemnity costs of $4,000 were awarded to the defendant.

The insurer requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal order finding the claimant entitled to medical benefits for physical rehabilitation and acupuncture.

The insurer argued that the hearing adjudicator made significant errors of law and fact by finding the expenses were incurred and reasonable and necessary, and by allegedly reversing the burden of proof.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the hearing adjudicator properly weighed the evidence, did not reverse the burden of proof, and made findings of fact that were within his discretion.

The Tribunal noted that a reconsideration is not an opportunity to re-litigate the matter.

The plaintiff, Margaret Ozimkowski, moved for partial summary judgment on liability against the defendant, Luc Raymond, following a rear-end motor vehicle collision on an icy road.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff's actions and the icy road conditions created a genuine issue for trial, and that granting partial summary judgment would risk inconsistent findings with his third-party claim against the County of Lanark.

The court found that the defendant failed to disprove his negligence, as the plaintiff's stop was reasonable given the conditions and visible emergency lights.

The court also determined that there was no risk of inconsistent findings with the third-party claim, as the issues were distinct.

Partial summary judgment on liability was granted to the plaintiff, with damages to be assessed at trial.