Zubin Kobad Zarolia

The moving defendants sought summary judgment dismissing claims arising from a motor vehicle accident on the basis that the action was commenced outside the two‑year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002.

The responding parties argued the claim was not discoverable until medical evidence confirmed that the injuries from the second accident met the statutory threshold and exceeded the deductible under the Insurance Act.

The court held that determining discoverability required a global assessment of injuries from two separate accidents and an apportionment of damages between them to determine whether the deductible for the second accident was exceeded.

These factual determinations required credibility assessments and expert evidence that could not be fairly resolved on a summary judgment motion.

The motion was therefore dismissed and the matter left for determination at trial.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After mediation failed, the applicant applied for arbitration.

The applicant subsequently lost contact with his counsel, failed to comply with production orders, and failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator granted the applicant's counsel's request to be removed from the record.

Finding that the applicant had abandoned his application, the arbitrator dismissed the application and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses fixed at $3,415.72.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed housekeeping expenses under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer denied the benefits based on an in-home assessment.

The arbitrator found the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform his pre-accident housekeeping activities for a limited period and awarded $315 in housekeeping benefits.

The arbitrator also granted a $40 special award because the insurer unreasonably withheld benefits for a four-week period prior to the assessment.

The insurer's claim that the arbitration was frivolous or vexatious was dismissed.

The respondent requested an adjournment of its appeal to retain new counsel after its previous counsel was removed from the record.

The applicants opposed the adjournment, citing a pattern of delay and concerns about the respondent's solvency, and brought a motion to dismiss the appeal.

The Divisional Court granted the adjournment but imposed strict terms, including making the new hearing date peremptory to the respondent, requiring the respondent to post security of $332,675, and ordering the respondent to pay $5,000 in costs thrown away.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits and medical benefits after the insurer terminated them.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was entitled to income replacement benefits for a limited period from July 22, 2000, to October 4, 2000, based on his family doctor's evidence of ongoing improvement.

However, relying on surveillance evidence and a Med Rehab DAC assessment, the arbitrator concluded the applicant was substantially able to perform his pre-accident employment as a welder after October 4, 2000.

The arbitrator also awarded $1,522 for chiropractic treatments but denied the claim for physiotherapy and massage treatments, finding them not reasonable and necessary.