• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

Latest News Articles

May 21, 2019

Ontario Government’s $1 million course correction!

Contained in the 2019 Ontario Budget, Protecting What Matters Most, the government announced that it will be restoring the ‘missing million’ in auto insurance coverage for the most seriously injured, or “catastrophically impaired”, that was slashed in 2016. 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Mixed news for accident victims in auto insurance reforms

Small savings on premiums can leave big deficits in care after an accident, says Toronto personal injury lawyer Gary Will
 
__________________________________________________________

New legal expense insurance trend represents challenge for PI lawyers

Legal expense insurance (LEI) was initially designed to increase access to justice for injured plaintiffs who would otherwise be unable to proceed to trial, but a recent development related to how insurers approach the product should concern all stakeholders, says Amanda Bafaro, Chief Risk Officer of Toronto-based specialist litigation finance firm BridgePoint Financial Services Inc
 
___________________________________________________________

What Surveillance Evidence Needs to Be Disclosed to Applicant? – 18-004555 RD v Wawanesa Insurance, 2019 CanLII 22203 (ON LAT)

SURVEILLANCE – is applicant entitled to surveillance evidence from respondent; is the evidence relevant to the issues in dispute;  is the evidence protected from disclosure by litigation privilege; surveillance that is related to the issues in dispute, if any, is relevant to this application; the respondent is not required to advise of the existence of any surveillance or provide copies of any surveillance evidence that relates to surveillance conducted after litigation privilege unless it intends to rely on it at the hearing 
 
___________________________________________________________

Injured Workers’ Day Rally

___________________________________________________________

Brain injuries unmasked

The 29-year-old said he can only piece together the events after the “scuffle” by the Sarnia waterfront from what people have told him, but he ended up in brain surgery in London for an epidural hematoma – bleeding between his skull and brain. 
 
___________________________________________________________

Five Ways to Support a Survivor of Traumatic Brain Injury

TBI (traumatic brain injury) can have profound and long lasting impacts you the life of the survivor of the injury and on their friends and family. Symptoms can range from physical impairments, to emotional difficulties, to cognitive impairment. Anger, depression, appetite loss and memory loss are common. These are compounded by the fact that there is usually little to no outward sign of disability – strangers don’t have a visual cue (such as a cane or walker) to be more patient, helpful, or understanding. 
 
____________________________________________________________
 
17-006563 v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, 2019 CanLII 40290 (ON LAT), http://canlii.ca/t/j0681
 [1]        This decision deals with a request for reconsideration focusing on a single question: whether the applicant is entitled to case management services under s. 17(1)(b) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, O. Reg 34/10 simply because she purchased the optional benefits described in s. 28(1)5 or, instead, whether she needs to have suffered a catastrophic impairment before being entitled to those services?            
[2]        The Tribunal held that the applicant needed to have suffered a catastrophic impairment before being entitled to case management services.  In the Tribunal’s words: I find s. 17(1)(b) when read in conjunction with s. 28(1) 5 of the Schedule provides an insured with entitlement to claim case management services if the optional catastrophic impairment benefit has been purchased and the insured has been deemed to have sustained a catastrophic impairment as a result of the accident. 
[3]        The applicant purchased a policy of automobile insurance from the respondent with the optional catastrophic impairment benefit as described in s. 28(1)5She was later injured in a motor vehicle accident and subsequently claimed entitlement to case management services. The parties agree that the applicant had not been deemed to have suffered from a catastrophic impairment. 
[4]        The applicant submits that the Tribunal made seven significant errors of law, dealt with below, in interpreting the above sections of the Schedule.  In essence, she argues that the Tribunal made a significant error of law that, if corrected, would likely have resulted a different decision: see Rule 18.2(b)  of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, Version 1 (April 1, 2016). 

Comments are closed.