Court of Appeal for Ontario
Lingard v. Milne-McIsaac
The Court of Appeal ruled that the Defendant Wawanesa was obligated to provide the Plaintiff Lingard with uninsured vehicle coverage.
Mangaleswary v TD Home and Auto
The FSCO adjudicator determined that out-of-pocket expenses constitute an economic loss, thereby satisfying the definition of incurred under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
Kolapully and TTC
The Applicant was a pedestrian when hit by a TTC Bus. The Adjudicator determined that the Applicant was entitled to the benefits she had been denied by the insurance company including non-earner benefits, medical benefits, the costs of assessments, reasonable expenses, and interest.
Applicant v TTC Insurance
Despite the efforts of the Insurer, the Applicant was found to be Catastrophically impaired by the License Appeal Tribunal, thereby raising the limits of her entitlements to benefits.
S.K. v TTC Insurance (Reconsideration Decision)
The LAT Adjudicator denied the request of an Insurance Company moving for reconsideration of an earlier decision determining that the Applicant was Catastrophically impaired.
17-001473 v Unica Insurance Inc.
Decision regarding Traumatic Brain Injury
17-001670/AABS v Travelers Insurance Company of Canada
Reconsideration decision regarding medical reasons and validity in denial of benefits.
J. G. v Travelers Canada
Decision following removal of the MIG based on invalid denial of benefits addressing costs.
17-001315 v Royal Sun Alliance Insurance
Decision regarding Insurer delayed response to benefits.
17-001670 v The Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company
Appealed decision regarding the MIG and denial notices.
17-01651/AABS v Dominion Insurance
Decision regarding sufficiency of pre-existing conditions and the MIG.
Divisional Court Judicial Review
TTC Insurance Company Limited v. Kolapully
The Applicant, TTC Insurance sought Judicial Review of a decision by the Director’s Delegate of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario. TTC submitted that the Arbitrator failed to apply the “continuously prevents’ aspect of the test for non-earner benefits, the Arbitrator made a palpable and overriding error in assessing Ms. Kolapully’s creditability, and the Arbitrator’s finding that her degree of impairments meeting the test of non-earner benefits was not supported by the record.
The Divisional Court found the Applicant’s submissions to “hold little merit” and that the Director’s Delegate decision was reasonable. The application was dismissed with costs awarded to our client in the amount of $25,000.00