Author Archives: Admin4

In today’s case (Cyr v. Kopp) the Plaintiff was involved in a rear end collision in 2011.  Fault was admitted on behalf of the rear driver.  The Plaintiff sustained Grade 2 soft tissue injuries to his neck and these also effected a pre-existing shoulder injury caused in an altercation with police.  The prognosis was not known as the Court accepted that the Plaintiff was not compliant with all suggested treatments and accordingly his injury may still be subject to improvement.

http://www.ilstv.com/75000-non-pecuniary-assessment-grade-2-soft-tissue-injuries-unknown-prognosis/

It is a scary thought for Ontario workers: the idea that the WSIB might not have enough money in reserves to pay out all potential future claims. For many years, WSIB has been operating with an unfunded liability (UFL) in the billions, but the Board says it’s now close to eliminating that deficit — years ahead of schedule, to boot.

http://www.vandykelaw.ca/2016/04/can-you-count-on-wsib/

The issue of whether the recent amendments to Ontario’s Insurance Act dealing with the indexation of the statutory deductible to inflation was recently before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Corbett v. Odorico, 2016 ONSC 1964 (CanLII).

http://www.millerthomson.com/en/blog/ontario-insurance-litigation-blog/retrospectively-or-not-retrospectively-that

The challenges facing the SRL are so much greater than the challenges lawyers face in dealing with them. I’m not sure whether lawyers really recognize that, and if they do, whether they give it adequate weight. There is always a significant power imbalance when a self-representing litigant enters a court proceeding opposite a party represented by counsel. We have all the tools at our disposal while they flounder and do their best with the limited resources available to them.

http://www.slaw.ca/2016/04/20/lawyers-and-self-represented-litigants/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

New issues will arise for personal injury lawyers from Ontario’s test phase 10-year pilot project into automated vehicles, but the true implications remain to be seen, predicts Helen Hall, personal injury litigation practice lead at Practical Law Canada.

http://www.advocatedaily.com/introduction-of-automated-vehicles-raises-issues-for-lawyers.html

These LTD policies are written by insurers, to minimize the potential exposure of an insurer; while giving the appearance that you’re getting amazing coverage. For most group and individual policies, you get what you pay for. The cheaper the policy, the cheaper the coverage. But even the best, and most iron clad policies are riddled with loop holes which may minimize your potential claim.

http://www.torontoinjurylawyerblog.com/2016/04/little-loop-holes-long-term-disability-policy-need-know-making-claim-ontario.html

A Hamilton-area physician suing the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board and her former employer for $3.2 million — claiming she was fired when she wouldn’t deliver a medical opinion that suited the WSIB — can proceed with the lawsuit, a Toronto judge ruled last week.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/04/21/doctor-sues-wsib-employer-after-refusing-to-change-medical-opinion.html

You may have heard rumblings that there are changes coming to your auto insurance; in fact, you’ve probably received something in the mail to the effect. Some changes have already happened—the mandated winter tire discount, for example—but most are coming into effect on June 1, 2016.

https://www.insurancehotline.com/changes-are-coming-to-your-ontario-auto-insurance/?utm_source=InsuranceHotline+Newsletter&utm_campaign=7b304d94c6-The+April+Insider_+DED_+01_19_16_FSCO+Q1&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_757e10cdb7-7b304d94c6-42205409

http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Brochures/Your-Auto%20Ins-Policy-is-changing.pdf

Good news from the Financial Services Commission of Ontario: average approved auto insurance rate changes are in and it looks like the majority of insurers will be lowering their premiums in just over a month.

http://www.lowestrates.ca/news/ontario-auto-insurance-about-get-cheaper

In today’s case (Matharu v. Gill) the Plaintiff was involved in a collision which the Defendant was found liable for.  She suffered moderate soft tissue injuries to her neck and shoulder which persisted to the time of trial and were expected to linger for sometime after although the ultimate prognosis was generally favorable.

http://www.ilstv.com/45000-non-pecuniary-assessment-persistent-not-disabling-soft-tissue-injuries/