Financial Services Commission of Ontario

Commission des services financiers de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2017 ONFSCDRS 120

Appeal P15-00064

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF ARBITRATIONS

SUKHDEV SINGH RANDHAWA Appellant

and

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Respondent

BEFORE: Delegate Jeffrey Rogers

REPRESENTATIVES: Mr. J.A.Michael Wolfe, solicitor for Mr. Randhawa Ms. Mouna B. Hanna, solicitor for State Farm

HEARING DATE: By written submissions, completed on April 18, 2017

APPEAL EXPENSES ORDER

Under section 283 of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. I.8 as it read immediately before being amended by Schedule 3 to the Fighting Fraud and Reducing Automobile Insurance Rates Act, 2014, and Regulation 664, R.R.O. 1990, as amended, it is ordered that:

Sukhdev Singh Randhawa shall pay State Farm Automobile Insurance Company its legal expenses of this appeal in the amount of $2,800 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

April 21, 2017

Jeffrey Rogers Director’s Delegate

Date

REASONS FOR DECISION

I. NATURE OF THE APPEAL

In a decision dated January 12, 2017, I dismissed Mr. Randhawa’s appeal of the Arbitrator’s decision, dated October 28, 2015. I found that the Arbitrator did not err in concluding that he was not injured as a result of an “accident” as defined. I also informed the parties that they may arrange an expense hearing in accordance with Rule 79 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, if they were unable to agree on the issue.

State Farm requested an expense hearing by letter dated January 13, 2017. I decided that the matter would be resolved by way of written submissions.

II. ANALYSIS

State Farm was completely successful in the appeal. I find no other relevant factors in determining entitlement to expenses. I find that State Farm is entitled to its expenses of the appeal, based upon its success.

State Farm claims $6,789.53 in fees and $731.99 in disbursements. The fees represent 41.8 counsel-hours, billed by three lawyers and a law clerk. The disbursements include a charge of $505.50 for a court reporter.

I agree with Mr. Randhawa that the claim for fees is excessive. This was a straightforward, single issue appeal of a preliminary issue decision. Further, the cost of a court reporter is not a recoverable disbursement.

It is now trite to say that a line-by-line assessment of expenses is not appropriate. Rather, a global assessment of reasonable expenses should be made. In assessing reasonableness, I am guided by Delegate Blackman’s review in Bains and RBC General Insurance Company.¹ He found that the average expense award to successful insurers was $2,812.91.

Considering that this was a straightforward appeal but rates for counsel have increased since Bains, I find that $2,800 is reasonable for State Farm’s appeal expenses, inclusive of disbursements and HST.