Arina Sukhomlina v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2014 ONFSCDRS 105

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2014 ONFSCDRS 105

FSCO A13-011530

BETWEEN:

ARINA SUKHOMLINA

Applicant

and

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE

INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before: Pamila Ahlfeld

Heard: May 23, 2014, at the offices of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in Toronto

Appearances: Olga Kanevsky for Ms. Sukhomlina

Justin Ho for State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Issues:

Should Ms. Kanevsky be allowed to withdraw as counsel for Ms. Sukhomlina?
Should Ms. Sukhomlina’s application for arbitration be dismissed?

Result:

Ms. Kanevsky is permitted to withdraw as counsel for Ms. Sukhomlina.
Ms. Sukhomlina’s application for arbitration is dismissed.

BACKGROUND:

The Applicant, Arina Sukhomlina, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on June 12, 2010. She applied for and received statutory accident benefits from State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and Ms. Sukhomlina applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.

A prehearing discussion was arranged at FSCO on April 8, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. The Applicant failed to appear. Her counsel did appear and indicated that she was unable to reach the Applicant. A hearing date was set for June 20, 2014 at FSCO at 10:00 a.m. The Applicant was sent a letter on April 8, 2014 advising her of the proceedings on June 20, 2014 and the consequences of non-attendance.

Ms. Kanevsky appeared at the hearing and filed a motion record on FSCO and State Farm requesting to get off the record. Mr. Ho requested that I dismiss the application for arbitration.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

I am satisfied from the letters filed by Ms. Kanevsky that she has made numerous attempts to contact the Applicant but to no avail. I am therefore satisfied that there has been a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship between Ms. Kanevsky and Ms. Sukhomlina. There was no objection from State Farm to Ms. Kanevsky’s withdrawal as counsel of record. Given all of the above factors, I permitted Ms. Kanevsky to withdraw as solicitor of record.

Turning to State Farm’s request that I dismiss the Applicant’s application for arbitration, I am satisfied that the Applicant has been notified of all of the proceedings that she was to attend at FSCO, via mail to her last known address. I have not received any return mail and State Farm has advised me that they have no change of address listed for the applicant. Furthermore, I attempted to contact the Applicant at the telephone number listed in her file. I was unable to reach her.

The onus is on the Applicant to establish entitlement to claims made in her Application for Arbitration. Ms. Sukhomlina has failed the meet this onus. Accordingly, I find that it is appropriate that the application for Arbitration for arbitration be dismissed.

EXPENSES:

State Farm is not seeking expenses for this application for arbitration.

June 25, 2014

Pamila Ahlfeld

Arbitrator

Date