[1] The defendant insurer moves under Rule 21 for an order to strike the statement of claim on the ground that it discloses no reasonable cause of action, and for determination of a question of law, to wit: whether the plaintiff’s claim is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Licence Appeal Tribunal.
a. that she was injured in a car accident,
b. that the defendant is liable to pay her Statutory Accident Benefits, and
c. that it has shown bad faith, negligence and fraud in administering her claim.
[3] As a result she claims damages for mental distress and aggravated and punitive damages.
[4] The defendant submits that the claim is barred by s.280 of the Insurance Act, SO 2014, c. 9, Sched. 3, s.14. The plaintiff says that the legislation prevents her from suing for accident benefits, but does not bar her independent claims for bad faith in the administration of accident benefits.
[]
[14] The legislature is presumed have known about Weber. There is no reason to doubt that the legislature, in enacting the present s.280 of the Insurance Act, intended to deprive a claimant of resort to the court at first instance whenever the claim is based on denial of accident benefits, no matter how the denial is characterized in legal terms.
[15] Accordingly I order that the statement of claim be struck without leave to amend, and I determine as a matter of law that the Licence Appeal Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the claim at first instance.