Neutral Citation: 2000 ONFSCDRS 140
FSCO A99-000292
FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION OF ONTARIO
BETWEEN:
JAGJEEVAN DEOL
Applicant
and
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Insurer
DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
Before: Shari Novick
Heard: March 15, May 5 and May 12, 2000, at the Offices of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in Toronto.
Appearances:
Bassanio Ghose for Mr. Deol
Shawn H. Patey for Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
Issues:
The Applicant, Jagjeevan Deol, was seriously injured when the vehicle he was travelling in collided with a bus on July 15, 1994, in India. The three other passengers in the vehicle, all relatives of his, died as a result of the accident.
Mr. Deol applied for statutory accident benefits from Liberty Mutual Insurance Company ("Liberty Mutual"), payable under the Schedule,1 in August of 1998. Liberty Mutual refused to pay any benefits, claiming that his application was out of time. The parties were unable to resolve their dispute through mediation, and Mr. Deol applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.
The preliminary issue in this hearing is:
Did Mr. Deol have a reasonable excuse for failing to notify Liberty Mutual of his claim for accident benefits within 30 days after the circumstances giving rise to his entitlement to benefits, or as soon as practicable thereafter, under subsection 59(4) of the Schedule?
Result:
Mr. Deol had a reasonable excuse within the meaning of subsection 59(4). His application can now proceed.
Some of the witnesses' evidence was translated from Punjabi by Kamla Behal from All Languages.
EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:
Background
Jagjeevan Deol suffered multiple injuries as a result of the accident that caused the death of his cousins Shelley Kaur and Tajinder Singh, as well as Shelley's new husband, while the four of them were driving in India. He and his family had travelled from Brampton, Ontario to India to celebrate Shelley's wedding, which had taken place shortly before the accident. Mr. Deol spent three weeks in hospital in India recovering from his injuries, and remained there for a further four months attending hospital on an outpatient basis. He returned home to Canada in early December 1994.
Mr. Deol was 18 years old at the time of the accident.
The parties agreed that Liberty Mutual first received notice of this claim in late June 1998, and that an Application for Accident Benefits was submitted to Liberty Mutual on Mr. Deol's behalf in August 1998. Counsel for Liberty advised at the hearing that it did not take the position that Mr. Deol was required to submit an application for benefits while recuperating from his injuries in India, and acknowledged that the "clock" should not start ticking until he returned to Canada in December 1994. In light of this concession by the Insurer, the application for benefits was submitted approximately three and one-half years beyond the 30-day time limit prescribed by section 59(1) of the Schedule.
In an earlier application for arbitration arising out of the same tragic accident, I awarded Baldev Kaur, Shelley and Tajinder's mother, death benefits and funeral expenses under the Schedule despite the fact that her application was filed with a similar delay.2 While some of the evidence I heard in this case overlapped with the evidence in that hearing, the focus in this case was quite different. In any event, the Schedule requires that an individualised inquiry be conducted in each case, in order to determine whether the applicant in question has a

