[1] The appellant appeals, on numerous grounds, from the motion judge’s decision striking her application for declaratory relief against the respondents as an abuse of process. At heart, the appellant claims that confidential and private health-related information provided by her to the respondent State Farm in support of her claim for statutory accident benefits was wrongly transmitted to persons outside Ontario without her prior knowledge or consent.
[2] The motion judge accepted State Farm’s position that the appellant’s complaints against State Farm have also been asserted in her pending action against it for accident benefits. In addition, the appellant has lodged similar complaints on essentially the same basis under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8 and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5 (“PIPEDA”), both of which provide comprehensive dispute resolution schemes. In these circumstances, the motion judge accepted State Farm’s submission that declaratory relief should not be granted where it will not resolve the disputes between the parties and there are other reasonably effective procedures available for dealing with those disputes.