Saro A. Setrakian

The defendant sought an adjournment of a long-standing motor vehicle accident trial, scheduled for June 2022, to allow for a Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) determination regarding the plaintiff's employment status at the time of the accident.

The WSIAT application was filed at the eleventh hour, a decade after the action commenced and after multiple trial dates had been fixed.

The court dismissed the adjournment request, finding it unfair to the plaintiff to further delay the case due to the defendant's belated application, and that it was not in the interests of justice.

The plaintiffs brought an action under s. 258(1) of the Insurance Act to recover insurance monies to satisfy a judgment arising from a settlement in a personal injury action.

The issue was which insurer—Gore Mutual (insurer of the vehicle owner) or Allstate (insurer of the injured passenger)—should satisfy the judgment.

The motion judge found Gore liable, concluding that the vehicle owner had not breached the insurance policy's cooperation clause and, alternatively, that relief from forfeiture was available.

Gore appealed, arguing the vehicle owner breached the policy by failing to cooperate and failing to provide updated contact information.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the vehicle owner's conduct did not constitute substantial non-cooperation as required to breach the cooperation condition.

The plaintiffs, Allan and Lorraine D’Souza, sued Home Depot of Canada Inc. and HD Roofing Inc. for misrepresentation, breach of contract, and negligence related to a deficient roof replacement.

They sought general, aggravated, punitive damages, and income loss.

The court found no misrepresentation or breach of contract regarding the warranty or skylight.

While the roofing job was negligent and exacerbated a pre-existing skylight leak, the majority of claimed damages were not causally linked to the negligence or constituted betterment.

The D'Souzas failed to mitigate their damages by refusing Home Depot's repeated offers to repair the deficiencies.

The court awarded limited damages totaling $5,772.38 for specific items, including a portion of ceiling damage, wet insulation, emergency repairs, and a portion of aspenite board replacement.

All other claims were dismissed.

The plaintiff, Arsim Grajqevci, suffered personal injuries from a motor vehicle accident.

Following a jury award, the statutory third party, Allstate Insurance Company, brought a motion for directions on two issues: (1) whether a threshold determination under s. 267.5(15) of the Insurance Act was required for non-pecuniary general damages and health care costs, even though the award for pain and suffering was reduced to nil by deductibles; and (2) whether payments received by the plaintiff from the Government of Ontario under the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) and Ontario Works (OW) should be deducted from the award for past loss of income.

The court ruled that a threshold determination was not required when the plaintiff was not entitled to an award for health care expenses or non-pecuniary loss after deductibles.

The court also found that OW and ODSP payments were not deductible because Allstate failed to establish they were "in respect of the incident" (the motor vehicle accident), as the benefits were primarily related to the plaintiff's other health conditions (HIV, tuberculosis).