Ying Zhang v. Co-operators General Insurance Company, 2016 ONFSCDRS 179

Financial Services Commission des Commission services financiers of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2016 ONFSCDRS 179

FSCO A13-006849

BETWEEN:

YING ZHANG

Applicant

and

CO-OPERATORS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before:

Arbitrator Barry S. Arbus, Q.C.

Heard:

In person at ADR Chambers on June 13, 2016

Appearances:

Ms. Alyson Toms for Ms. Ying Zhang

Mr. Bruce Keay for Co-operators General Insurance Company

Issues:

The Applicant, Ms. Ying Zhang, was injured in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on September 11, 2011. She applied for and received statutory accident benefits from Co-operators General Insurance Company (“Co-operators”) payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation and the Applicant applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, as amended.

The issues in this Hearing are:

Should the Applicant’s Application for Arbitration be dismissed?
Should the Insurer be granted costs or expenses in respect of the Application for Arbitration?

Result:

The Applicant’s Application for Arbitration is dismissed.
The Insurer is granted $500.00 in expenses in respect of the Application for Arbitration.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

The Arbitration Hearing in this matter was scheduled for June 13, 2016 at the ADR Chambers offices located at 180 Duncan Mill Road, Toronto. Mr. Bruce Keay, Co-operators’ counsel, was present, and Ms. Alyson Toms appeared for the Applicant, but the Applicant was not present.

After waiting a suitable time for the Applicant, and her failure to appear, Mr. Keay brought a Motion to dismiss the Applicant’s Application for Arbitration.

I am satisfied that the Applicant had been notified of all proceedings to date and was aware that she was to attend the Hearing. I am also satisfied that the Applicant was aware that her failure to attend would result in Co-operators bringing a Motion to dismiss the Application for Arbitration.

The Applicant has the onus of proof to establish her entitlement to her Application for Arbitration and her failure to attend accordingly means that she has failed to meet this onus.

Conclusion

Therefore, I find all of the above reasons are sufficient to dismiss the Application for Arbitration.

EXPENSES:

Mr. Keay has requested expenses in this matter as a result of the dismissal of the Applicant’s Application for Arbitration. I am prepared to grant the Insurer the sum of $500.00 in expenses in accordance with the provisions of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code and Section 282(11) of the Insurance Act.

June 27, 2016

Barry S. Arbus, Q.C. Arbitrator

Date