Sara Nagalingam

This decision concerns the approval of a class action settlement and associated legal fees and honoraria following an aircraft accident.

The class action arose from a November 9, 2018 incident where Fly Jamaica Flight OJ 256 made an emergency landing, resulting in substantial damage and passenger injuries.

After extensive negotiations, a $5,550,000.00 lump sum settlement was reached.

The court approved the settlement agreement, certified the action against newly added defendants for settlement purposes, approved class counsel's fees of 25% of the settlement amount plus disbursements, and approved a $5,000 honorarium for each representative plaintiff.

The court found the settlement to be within the range of reasonableness and the fees to be fair and reasonable.

This endorsement from a case conference addressed procedural issues concerning examinations for discovery scheduled for a three-week period.

Key issues included confirming the discovery schedule for defendants, determining the order of examination between co-plaintiffs, and allocating discovery costs.

The court set the discovery schedule, ordered one plaintiff's counsel to examine witnesses first due to preparedness, and denied a request for an advance list of questions.

Costs were apportioned 3/4 to one plaintiff's clients and 1/4 to the self-represented plaintiff.

The plaintiff brought a motion for leave to amend the statement of claim to add a claim for punitive damages against a defendant who rear-ended the plaintiff's vehicle while impaired.

The defendant opposed the amendment, arguing she had already paid her debt to society through a criminal conviction and fine.

The court granted the motion, noting that a prior criminal penalty is a factor to consider but not an absolute bar to punitive damages, and found no non-compensable prejudice to the defendant.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits from the insurer, including attendant care benefits, medical benefits for an eye exam, and replacement costs for damaged clothing and prescription sunglasses.

The insurer denied the benefits.

The arbitrator found the applicant was entitled to attendant care benefits at the rate determined by the initial assessment, as the service provider had sustained an economic loss.

The arbitrator also awarded the costs of the eye exam and prescription sunglasses, but denied the clothing claims due to a lack of receipts.

Furthermore, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay a special award of 50% of the owing benefits, finding that the insurer had unreasonably withheld payment contrary to the Schedule and ignored evidence of the service provider's economic loss.