Joan Giff v. Security National Insurance Co./Monnex Insurance Mgmt. Inc., 2010 ONFSCDRS 56

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2010 ONFSCDRS 56

FSCO A09-001301

BETWEEN:

JOAN GIFF

Applicant

and

SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE CO./MONNEX INSURANCE MGMT. INC.

Insurer

DECISION ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

Before: Arbitrator Richard Feldman

Heard: By written hearing, conducted in accordance with Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code

Issues:

The preliminary issue is:

Pursuant to Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, should this application be dismissed without a hearing because it is frivolous or vexatious?

Result:

This application is dismissed.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

Joan Giff commenced this application against the Insurer on May 21, 2009. The Insurer filed its response on or about June 22, 2009.

According to counsel for both parties, a pre-hearing conference was held in this case on December 17, 2009 but the Applicant failed to attend on that occasion. I did not preside over that pre-hearing conference.

The pre-hearing conference was re-scheduled to 2:00 p.m. on March 24, 2010. The Applicant was advised of the particulars of this meeting in writing both by her counsel and by the Commission. I presided over this pre-hearing conference. Counsel for the Applicant (Ms. Pollock) and for the Insurer (Ms. Manning) attended but, again, the Applicant failed to attend.

On March 24, 2010, I granted Ms. Pollock’s motion to be removed from the record as counsel for the Applicant. I also heard the Insurer’s request that I dismiss this application as being frivolous or vexatious. Pursuant to Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, I wrote to the Applicant on March 24, 2010 to advise her as follows:

Pursuant to Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, an adjudicator may dismiss a proceeding without a hearing where the proceeding is frivolous, vexatious or is commenced in bad faith.

It is my intention to grant the Insurer’s request to dismiss this application unless the Applicant can provide reasonable grounds for doing otherwise. In accordance with Rule 68.3, if Ms. Giff wishes to dispute such a dismissal, I grant her twenty days from the date of this letter in which to serve upon Security National and file with me any written submissions she wishes me to consider, setting out the grounds upon which she objects to the dismissal of the proceeding or setting out any other issues or concerns.

After the twenty days have elapsed, I shall consider any written objections or submissions received and make an order on such terms as I consider just.

To date, I have received no written submissions (or any other communication) from Ms. Giff. She has failed to attend two pre-hearing discussions without excuse and appears to have no interest in pursuing this matter any further. I therefore find that this application has become vexatious and, as such, it ought to be dismissed.

If either party wishes to make any submissions with respect to the issue of expenses, they may do so in accordance with Rules 75-79 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

May 6, 2010

Richard Feldman

Arbitrator

Date