The recent case of Scarlett v. Belair Insurance Decision Date: 2013-03-26, Adjudicator: John Wilson, Regulation: 34/10, Decision: Arbitration, Preliminary Issue, FSCO 3965 is the first reported Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) case.
The gist of the decisions stand for the proposition that injured insureds should not be required to take extraordinary steps, or be forced to make leaps and bounds to...Read More
The recent case of Scarlett v. Belair, FSCO A12-00107, is important more for what it demonstrates in terms of the state of automobile first party insurance benefits in Ontario at the present time, than as an analysis of the application of the Minor Injury Guideline in the legal context.
They key factors that support this contention are:
1. The amount of time it took Mr. Scarlett to obtain a...Read More
Social Justice: Superintendent cloaks policy issue as science on catastrophic impairment
Monday, September 10, 2012 | Written by Alan Shanoff | Law Times
The superintendent’s report on the definition of catastrophic impairment in the statutory accident benefits...Read More
The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld the judgement in Herbert v. The City of Brantford.
The Ontario Court of Appeal decision can be found at http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2012/2012ONCA0098.pdf
Mr. Herbert was injured when he lost control of his bicylce on a pathway owned by the City of Brantford. The pathway was poorly maintained and constructed and the Trial Judge found the...Read More
Accident victim’s rights to expansive first party or “no-fault” benefits in catastrophic cases has been boosted by the recent decision in Kusnierz v. The Economical Mutual Insurance Company, 2010 ONSC 5749 (CanLII). The decision overturns the trial decision.
At trial the judge determined that psychological impairments could not be considered in conjunction with physcal...Read More
In an action against the Hamilton Police in negligence for failing to arrest Hamilton’s “Most Wanted Criminal” Corey Rogers, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has dismissed a motion by the police which, if successful, would have stopped the lawsuit. By virtue of the Ruling the plaintiffs are permitted to proceed. The case is under appeal. The plaintiffs are...Read More
An insurer is required to defend a claim where the facts alleged in the pleadings, if proven to be true, would require the insurer to indemnify the insured for the claim. It is irrelevant whether the allegations in the pleadings can be proven in evidence. What is required is the mere possibility that a claim falls within the insurance policy. Where it is clear that the claim falls outside...Read More
The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a claim for damages of mental distress caused by the failure of Echelon Insurance to properly adjust a claim arising from a motor vehicle collision.
“People purchase motor vehicle liability policies to protect themselves from financial and emotional stress and insecurity. An object of such contracts is to secure a psychological benefit that brought the...Read More
THRESHOLD UPDATE: NISSAN AND ITS AFTERMATHThe most recent amendments to the Insurance Act otherwise known as Bill 198 came into effect on October 1, 2003. The amendments came by way of Ontario Regulation 381/03 which amended O.Reg. 461/96 and added definitions of the terms making up the general threshold identified in s.267.5(5) of the Insurance Act. The Regulation now defines the terms...Read More