Mohammed Muslim

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing, and his counsel sought an adjournment and to be removed from the record.

The arbitrator adjourned the hearing to allow counsel to bring a proper motion.

On the return date, neither the applicant nor his counsel attended.

The arbitrator dismissed the arbitration as an abuse of process.

Finding that the applicant's counsel failed to honour undertakings, failed to properly remove himself from the record, and abandoned his client, the arbitrator ordered counsel to personally pay the insurer's expenses of $4,205.61 pursuant to section 282(11.2) of the Insurance Act.

The applicant claimed statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, which the insurer denied.

After the applicant failed to retain new counsel or contact the Commission for several months following an initial adjournment, the insurer assumed the applicant would not attend the rescheduled preliminary issue hearing and appeared without witnesses.

The insurer brought a motion to adjourn the hearing.

The arbitrator granted the adjournment, finding the insurer's assumption reasonable given the applicant's conduct, and ordered the new date peremptory to both parties.

The insurer sought its expenses following a successful arbitration regarding statutory accident benefits.

The insurer claimed $5,486.60 in legal fees and disbursements, calculated at the Legal Aid rate.

The applicants did not dispute the hours or disbursements but argued the arbitrator had jurisdiction to reduce the amount based on general fairness and their impecuniosity.

The arbitrator found no jurisdiction in the Expense Regulation to reduce the costs on those grounds and found the claimed amount reasonable.

Each applicant was ordered to pay half of the insurer's expenses, amounting to $2,743.30 each.

The applicants claimed statutory accident benefits following an alleged motor vehicle collision.

The insurer denied the claims, arguing the collision did not occur as described.

At arbitration, the insurer presented expert evidence from an accident reconstruction engineer who concluded the damage to the vehicles was inconsistent with the reported accident.

The arbitrator found the applicants lacked credibility due to numerous unexplained discrepancies in their evidence and accepted the expert's conclusion that the accident did not occur.

The application for benefits was dismissed, and the applicants were ordered to pay the insurer's expenses.