Rudolph Lobl, Q.C.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received caregiver benefits, which the insurer terminated after 104 weeks.

The applicant attended a scheduled DAC assessment but insisted on videotaping it.

The DAC refused to proceed and charged a cancellation fee.

The insurer argued the applicant failed to make himself reasonably available for the assessment under section 50 of the Schedule and sought reimbursement of the fee.

The arbitrator found that the applicant made himself reasonably available by attending the assessment, and it was the DAC that refused to proceed without providing reasons.

The applicant was permitted to proceed to arbitration and was not required to pay the cancellation fee.

The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and initially awarded ongoing income replacement benefits.

Years later, the respondent insurer applied to revoke the benefits, arguing a material change in circumstances.

The arbitrator found that the appellant's medical condition had improved and that her extensive involvement in a highly successful gospel choir demonstrated a capacity for suitable employment, terminating her benefits.

On appeal, the Director's Delegate upheld the arbitrator's decision, finding no error of law in the determination that a material change had occurred and that the appellant was no longer continuously prevented from engaging in suitable employment.

The insurer appealed an arbitrator's decision awarding the respondent ongoing weekly income benefits beyond the 156-week mark.

The respondent, a student at the time of the accident, suffered from chronic pain syndrome and post-traumatic headaches.

The Director's Delegate upheld the arbitrator's refusal to grant an adjournment for late-requested medical assessments, finding the request untimely.

The Delegate also upheld the finding that the respondent was continuously prevented from engaging in any suitable occupation or employment, noting the uncontradicted medical evidence supporting her severe limitations.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, a pedestrian injured in a motor vehicle accident, appealed an arbitration decision that terminated his weekly income benefits and ordered him to repay overpaid benefits.

The Director of Arbitrations upheld the arbitrator's findings that the appellant was no longer substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of his occupation, based on medical and rehabilitation evidence.

Furthermore, the Director affirmed the arbitrator's conclusion that the appellant's financial records were unreliable and constructed after the accident, justifying the calculation of his income benefits at the minimum rate.

The appeal was dismissed.

The insurer appealed an arbitration decision determining the insured's weekly income benefits at $600 per week.

The central issue was when real estate commissions become income for the purpose of calculating pre-accident income under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The Director's Delegate held that real estate commissions are earned when there is an unconditional agreement of purchase and sale, rejecting both the 'closing date' and 'work completed' approaches.

Applying this principle, the insured's weekly income benefits were recalculated to $348.61 per week.

The issue of whether the insured must repay any overpayment was referred back to arbitration.

The unrepresented applicant reached a lump sum settlement with the insurer during a pre-hearing discussion and signed a full and final release.

Shortly after, she attempted to revoke the settlement, arguing it was unfair and that there was an inequality of bargaining power.

The arbitrator found the settlement binding.

On appeal, the Director of Arbitrations upheld the arbitrator's decision, finding no evidence of unconscionability, undue influence, or other vitiating factors, and noting that the pre-hearing arbitrator had taken appropriate steps to ensure the applicant understood the consequences of signing the release.