Clyne Amuta v. Unifund Assurance Company, 2021 CanLII 64238

Licence Appeal Tribunal

Citation: Amuta vs. Unifund Assurance Company, 2021 ONLAT 20-000888/AABS

Released Date: 07/20/2021

In the matter of an Application pursuant to subsection 280(2) of the Insurance Act, RSO 1990, c I.8., in relation to statutory accident benefits.

Between:

Clyne Amuta

Applicant

and

Unifund Assurance Company

Respondent

DECISION

ADJUDICATOR:

Robert Watt

APPEARANCES:

For the Applicant: Sally Cacciotti, AB Specialist

For the Respondent: John P Desjardins, Counsel

HEARD: by Videoconference:

July 14, 2021

OVERVIEW

1The applicant was involved in an automobile accident on December 11, 2017, and sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule - Effective September 1, 2010 (the ''Schedule''). The applicant was denied certain benefits by the respondent and submitted an application to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (“Tribunal”).

2Ultimately, a preliminary issue video-conference hearing was set for two days for July 14-15, 2021.

3The applicant bought a motion to adjourn the hearing on June 9, 2021. The applicant did not attend the telephone motion hearing or have anyone attend on his behalf. Adjudicator Maedel denied the motion for an adjournment, on June 25, 2021.

4Adjudicator Maedel in his Motion Order put the applicant on Notice under Rule 3.5, that his application may be dismissed under Rule 3.4 as abandoned, if he failed to attend the preliminary issue hearing set for July14-15, 2021. Adjudicator Maedel also asked the applicant to file written reasons why his application should not be dismissed, by July 9, 2021. No written reasons were filed by the applicant.

5On July 14, 2021, the applicant did not attend the videoconference hearing or have a representative attend on his behalf. The Tribunal and the Respondent waited 30 minutes before ending the hearing.

6I was advised after the hearing ended, that an administrative problem occurred, whereby the applicant was given the wrong videoconference link.

7The Tribunal under its Common Rules of Practice and Procedure is required to facilitate a fair, open and accessible process, and to allow effective participation.

8As the failure of the applicant to attend the hearing was not the applicant’s fault, I am setting another two-day hearing to be scheduled for September 16-17, 2021 starting at 9:30 a.m. The Tribunal will send the video link to the parties.

9If the dates chosen for the new hearing are not available to either party, that party may send in a request for an adjournment to the Tribunal, along with other available hearing dates.

CONCLUSION

10I have reset new dates for another two-day hearing, subject to any party’s request for an adjournment to other dates.