Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 23-000743/AABS

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:

Jared Jallah

Applicant

and

Wawanesa Insurance

Respondent

MOTION ORDER

ADJUDICATOR:

Lindsay Lake, Vice-Chair

APPEARANCES:

For the Applicant:

No submissions were requested

For the Respondent:

Morgan MacDonald, Counsel

Motion heard in writing:

January 17, 2024

BACKGROUND

1The applicant was injured in an automobile accident on February 2, 2020 and sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule Effective September 1, 2010 (including amendments effective June 1, 2016).

2The applicant was denied certain benefits and submitted an application to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (Tribunal).

3A case conference took place on September 18, 2023 and a Case Conference Report and Order (CCRO) was issued to the parties on September 26, 2023. Paragraph 4 of the CCRO states that the applicant agreed to provide the respondent with the following up to the date of the case conference by no later than November 2, 2023:

a. CMHA Waterloo Wellington Records; and

b. Ontario School Records, from December 14, 2021.

4A written hearing is scheduled in this matter for May 24, 2024.

MOTION

5On January 17, 2024, the respondent filed a Notice of Motion requesting that the Tribunal issue an order compelling the applicant to provide to it the same documents set out in the CCRO and as set out above in paragraph [3].

RESULT

6The respondent's motion is denied.

ANALYSIS AND REASONS

7The productions sought by the respondent were previously ordered to be produced by the applicant in the CCRO, which is also an Order of the Tribunal. A further order is duplicative and redundant.

8A hearing adjudicator can provide relief as a result of a party’s failure to produce records as ordered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal can grant remedies for non-compliance, such as attaching diminished weight to late-produced evidence or drawing adverse inferences from a party’s failure to produce records.

9In summary, the Tribunal’s production order continues in force and requires no sequel. Parties fail to comply with these orders at their own risk; the risk that a hearing adjudicator may find against them for failing to meet their onus, or for causing prejudice to the opposing party. It is open to the Tribunal to consider the merits of the case based on the available evidence and the parties can make submissions to the hearing adjudicator as to how weight should be apportioned to it.

ORDER

10The respondent’s motion is denied.

11Except for the provisions contained in this Order all previous Orders made by the Tribunal remain in full force and effect.

12If the parties reach an agreement on the issues in dispute, the applicant shall immediately advise the Tribunal in writing.

13I am not seized of this matter.