COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DATE: 20000228

DOCKET: C30221

RE: RONALD JAANSOO (Plaintiff (Appellant)) – and –

CANADIAN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (Defendant

(Respondent))

BEFORE: FINLAYSON, LABROSSE AND GOUDGE JJ.A.

COUNSEL: Faisal B. Joseph

For the appellant

W. Colin Osterberg

For the respondent

HEARD: February 23, 2000

On appeal from the judgment of McCart J. dated June 16, 1998,

made at London, Ontario.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] It is conceded by the respondent that if the trial judge

required that to be a reasonable expense an expenditure must

confer a significant benefit, he erred. We agree, but we read the

trial judge rather to be saying that given the evidence and the

language of the reports before him, he concluded that the

proposed expenditure would confer no more than an insignificant

benefit. He was not attempting to establish a legal threshold.

[2] On the evidence before him it was open to him to conclude

that the proposed expenditure was not a reasonable expense. We

note the respondent’s acknowledgement that it is still open to

the appellant to seek to have the respondent provide him with the

T.E.A.C.H. program if he can demonstrate that in the present

circumstances it is a reasonable expense.

[3] The issue of costs was never argued before the trial judge

and he retired on the day his reasons were issued. In the

circumstances we grant leave to appeal the costs order. Given the

novel point in issue, we think that there should have been no

order as to costs of the trial.

[4] The appeal is allowed as to costs, but is otherwise

dismissed without costs.

“G.D. Finlayson J.A.”

“J.M. Labrosse J.A.

“S.T. Goudge J.A.”