Shahen Armen Alexanian

The appellant sought a stay of an arbitrator's order requiring her to pay the respondent's legal expenses, pending her appeal of the decision denying her attendant care benefits.

The Director's Delegate applied the Armstrong criteria and found that the appeal was bona fide, had apparent substance regarding the interpretation of subsection 3(8) of the SABS, and that the appellant would suffer undisputed hardship if the stay was refused.

The Delegate also noted the arbitrator failed to receive submissions on expenses, raising natural justice concerns.

The stay of the expense order and the arbitration expense hearing was granted.

The applicant sought expenses following an arbitration decision where she was partially successful in claiming housekeeping and home maintenance benefits.

The applicant claimed $15,537.50 in legal fees and $2,722.00 in disbursements.

The insurer argued each party should bear its own expenses.

The arbitrator considered the degree of success, settlement offers, and conduct during the proceeding under Rule 75 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

Finding the applicant partially successful and the case not complex, the arbitrator awarded $3,000.00 for fees and $2,722.00 for disbursements, totaling $5,722.00.

The applicant sought to revoke an order dismissing her application for arbitration regarding statutory accident benefits.

The original order was made after she failed to attend pre-hearings and the arbitration hearing because she was out of the country.

The applicant provided evidence that she was unable to travel back to Canada due to a high-risk pregnancy and lacked the means to contact her solicitors while abroad.

The arbitrator found that this information was not reasonably available at the time of the arbitration and that the most just result was to allow the matter to proceed on its merits.

The application to revoke the dismissal order was granted, and the parties were ordered to bear their own expenses.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After the applicant failed to attend multiple pre-hearing conferences and preliminary issue hearings, his counsel requested to be removed from the record due to an inability to contact the applicant for instructions.

The arbitrator granted the request to remove counsel and, with the consent of the insurer, dismissed the application for arbitration pursuant to Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

Following a jury trial where liability was admitted, the jury awarded the plaintiff $30,000 in damages.

However, the court granted the defendants' threshold motion, finding the plaintiff's injuries did not meet the statutory exceptions under the Insurance Act, resulting in a nil judgment.

Both parties sought costs.

The court held that because the plaintiff obtained a nil judgment, the cost consequences of Rule 49.10 did not apply.

Applying the factors under Rule 57.01, the court awarded the successful defendants their costs on a partial indemnity basis, fixed at $32,500.

Following a motor vehicle collision, the defendants admitted liability and the jury awarded general damages and future health care expenses.

While the jury was deliberating, the defendants brought a threshold motion under the Insurance Act seeking a declaration that the plaintiff's injuries did not meet the statutory exception for permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental or psychological function.

The court accepted that the plaintiff had chronic pain and that his condition was permanent, but held the evidence did not establish a serious impairment causing substantial interference with regular training or most usual activities of daily living.

The plaintiff's ability to complete ESL training and continue household activities undermined the claim that the threshold was met.

The motion was granted and the action dismissed.

The applicant was injured when she fell inside a public transit bus due to sudden acceleration.

She applied for statutory accident benefits, claiming housekeeping and home maintenance benefits as well as the cost of custom orthotics, which the insurer denied.

The arbitrator found the applicant's testimony regarding her symptoms credible and supported by objective medical evidence, including an MRI showing a tear in her right wrist and an ankle effusion.

The arbitrator rejected the insurer's medical assessments, noting they failed to consider the MRI results.

The applicant was awarded housekeeping benefits at $100 per week for the initial period and $50 per week thereafter, along with the cost of the custom orthotics and interest on overdue payments.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits.

After disputes arose, the applicant applied for arbitration.

The applicant failed to attend multiple pre-hearings and failed to produce ordered documents.

The insurer brought a motion to dismiss the arbitration proceeding under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator granted the motion, dismissing the application for arbitration as vexatious due to the applicant's failure to participate, and awarded the insurer $500 in costs thrown away.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits, including caregiver, attendant care, housekeeping, and medical benefits, following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer terminated these benefits after approximately one year based on insurer examinations finding no objective evidence of impairment.

The arbitrator dismissed all of the applicant's claims, finding the applicant lacked credibility due to his failure to disclose a significant pre-accident history of chronic pain to his assessors and his family doctor.

The arbitrator gave little weight to the applicant's medical expert, whose opinion relied entirely on the applicant's subjective and unreliable history.