Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunal Ontario
Licence Appeal Tribunal
Automobile Accident Benefits Service
Mailing Address: 77 Wellesley St. W., Box 250, Toronto, ON M7A 1N3
Tel:
416-314-4260
1 800-255-2214
TTY:
416-916-0548
1 844-403-5906
FAX:
416-325-1060
1 844-618-2566
Website: www.slasto.gov.on.ca/en/AABS
Tribunaux de la sécurité, des appels en matière de permis et des normes Ontario
Tribunal d'appel en matière de permis
Service d'aide relative aux indemnités d'accident automobile
Adresse postale : 77, rue Wellesley Ouest, Boîte no 250, Toronto ON M7A 1N3
Tél. :
416-314-4260
1 800-255-2214
ATS :
416-916-0548
1 844-403-5906
Téléc. :
416-325-1060
1 844-618-2566
Site Web : www.slasto.gov.on.ca/fr/AABS
MOTION DECISION
Before: Jonathan Batty, Associate Chair
File: 18-005352/AABS
Case Name: T.P. v. TD Home and Auto Insurance Company
Written Submissions By:
For the Applicant: Sylvia Guirguis, Campisi LLP
For the Respondent: Carol-Anne Wyseman, TD Insurance
1This application concerns a claim for attendant care benefits (ACBs). Specifically, the discrete issue whether they were “incurred” as defined in the Schedule.
2On December 4, 2018, the applicant requested a reconsideration of a Case Conference Order made on October 16, 2018 (but released on November 28, 2018).
3Pursuant to her authority under s. 17(2) of the Adjudicative Tribunals Accountability, Governance and Appointments Act, 2009, S.O. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 5, the Executive Chair delegated to me her responsibility to decide this reconsideration request.
4The adjudicator for the case conference ordered, on consent, that this matter proceed as a written hearing and set the schedule for the exchange of documents and the serving and filing of written submissions and accompanying evidence. The order noted that the parties had agreed that no affidavits would be submitted as evidence at the hearing. Subsequent to the making and release of the order, the applicant has sought by way of reconsideration to have affidavit evidence introduced in the proceeding or, in the alternative, the matter be converted to an oral hearing.
5I have read the submissions of both parties. While they take different positions on how to proceed, it is evident to me that they agree that the use of affidavits was not specifically raised by the parties at the case conference.
6Given this situation, the appropriate course of action for the applicant once it was apparent that evidence from one or more witnesses was required would have been to bring a motion to vary the case conference order. The applicant has simply not established that the Case Conference Order warrants reconsideration.
7For the sake of expediency, I have converted the applicant’s request to a motion request and dealt with it as such. The Tribunal advised the parties of this on January 11, 2019. It further advised the parties that the previous dates for written submissions were vacated.
8Precluding affidavit evidence in a written hearing dealing with this type of issue would bar the applicant from presenting and being able to prove her case. The issue in dispute will require evidence as to the type, duration and necessity of the services provided. It will require information from the service provider, the applicant’s mother, that she sustained an economic loss.
9I see no prejudice to the respondent in permitting affidavit evidence in this case as the respondent will, of course, be afforded the right of cross-examination.
10I grant the applicant’s request to submit affidavit evidence for the written hearing.
11Parties will be contacted by the Tribunal to schedule a brief resumed case conference before me to establish a revised schedule for the written hearing.
Jonathan Batty Associate Chair`
Licence Appeal Tribunal
Released: January 30, 2019