Douglas Facey v. Intact Insurance Company, 2014 ONFSCDRS 46

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2014 ONFSCDRS 46

FSCO A11-002826

BETWEEN:

DOUGLAS FACEY

Applicant

and

INTACT INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

MOTION DECISION

Before: Anne Sone

Heard: By telephone conference call on December 20, 2013

Appearances: Alexander Mazin for Mr. Facey Dilraj Sandhu for Intact Insurance Company

Issues:

The Applicant, Douglas Facey, was involved in a motor vehicle accident on April 19, 2010. He applied for statutory accident benefits from Intact Insurance Company (“Intact”), payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and Mr. Facey applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.

The issue in this hearing is:

Should Alexander Mazin be permitted to withdraw as the representative for Douglas Facey?

Result:

Alexander Mazin is permitted to withdraw as the representative for Douglas Facey.

Motion Seeking Permission to Withdraw:

On December 5, 2013, Alexander Mazin served a Motion Record seeking permission to withdraw as the representative for Mr. Facey. The Motion Record indicates that Mr. Facey was incarcerated, and was not reachable by telephone or e-mail. As a result, it was extremely difficult to obtain instructions from him.

Law regarding Motion to Withdraw Representation:

The Dispute Resolution Practice Code (Fourth edition, Updated January 2014) sets out at Rules 9.7 and 9.8 what a representative who seeks to withdraw from a proceeding must do. The representative must provide the following:

(a) a written request for withdrawal, with reasons, to the Dispute Resolution Group (“DRG”) and all parties to the proceeding;

(b) the last known address, telephone number and electronic transmission address (if any) of the represented party.

If the represented party does not provide written consent to the representative’s request for withdrawal, an adjudicator may permit the representative to withdraw, subject to such terms as the adjudicator considers just.

Conclusion:

Mr. Mazin has provided a written request for withdrawal of his representation of Mr. Facey through his Motion Record.The Motion Record sets out Mr. Facey’s last known address.

Due to the inability to reach Mr. Facey, I conclude that there has been a complete breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, and permit Mr. Mazin to withdraw as the representative for Mr. Facey.

March 25, 2014

Anne Sone Arbitrator

Date