Tomassi v. Unifund Assurance Company, 2023 CanLII 13012

1The applicant was involved in an automobile accident on January 2, 2019, and sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Effective September 1, 2010 (the “Schedule”).¹ The applicant was denied certain benefits by the Unifund Assurance Company, (the “respondent”), and submitted an application to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (the “Tribunal”).

PRELIMINARY ISSUE

2The respondent submits that the applicant should be precluded from relying on the clinical notes and records (“CNRs”) of the MCI The Doctor’s Office, as the respondent was never provided these records despite numerous requests. The applicant failed to comply with the Tribunal’s Case Conference Report and Order which required the applicant to produce “CNRs for all treating practitioners one-year pre-accident to date and ongoing.”²

3In response, the applicant submits that the CNRs were provided to the respondent as part of the applicant’s submissions on February 17, 2022 and submits that there was no prejudice to the respondent.

4Though I do appreciate the respondent’s submissions, I find that the respondent failed to provide any submissions or evidence of prejudice as a result of the preliminary issue of the CNRs.

5However, I will consider the non-compliance with a previous Order when assessing the weight of the evidence.

6I would be remiss