Natasha Anand

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2019 motor vehicle accident.

The respondent insurer denied benefits and argued the applicant was barred from proceeding to the Tribunal because she failed to submit an application for benefits (OCF-1) within 30 days of receiving the forms, as required by section 32(5) of the Schedule.

The applicant claimed she had submitted the form and alternatively argued her pre-existing brain injury provided a reasonable explanation for any delay.

The Tribunal found the applicant's explanation was not credible, noting a further six-month delay in submitting the OCF-1 even after she retained counsel and was explicitly advised the form was missing.

The application was dismissed pursuant to section 55(1) of the Schedule.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits after slipping and falling on ice while attempting to open the passenger door of his parked vehicle.

The respondent insurer denied benefits, arguing the incident did not meet the definition of an 'accident' under s. 3(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The Tribunal applied the purpose and causation tests, finding that opening the vehicle door was an ordinary use of an automobile and the dominant feature of the incident.

The Tribunal concluded that the icy ground was not an intervening act that broke the chain of causation, and therefore the incident qualified as an accident.

The moving defendants brought a motion seeking to dismiss the action for delay, an order for a further and better affidavit of documents, and answers to refusals.

The court dismissed the motion to dismiss, noting the action had already been set down for trial.

The court largely dismissed the requests for further productions and refusals, finding the plaintiff had made reasonable efforts to obtain third-party records and that the defendants should seek non-party production under Rule 30.10 if they desired further documents.

The moving defendants were ordered to pay $1,500 in costs.