Skip to the content
  • Areas of Practice
  • Mediation
  • Our Lawyers
  • News
  • Case Summaries
    • LAT Law Cases
    • Commercial/Tort Law Cases
  • Areas of Practice
  • Mediation
  • Our Lawyers
  • News
  • Case Summaries
    • LAT Law Cases
    • Commercial/Tort Law Cases

LAT Case Law Summaries

Commercial/Tort Case Law Summaries

Back To All Case Summaries
Back To All Case Summaries

Xin v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (19-009204)

  • December 6, 2021

The claimant was in international student from China. She came to Canada in 2014 to attend school and was involved in a motor vehicle accident in 2017. She sustained injuries to her head, neck, arm, knee, shoulder, back and left side. She did not report the accident to the police or seek medical attention on the date of loss. The claimant stated that she moved in with her boyfriend post-accident because she was “unable to do anything”. In 2019, the claimant submitted two OCF-6s for $2,070.32 and $1,908.90 related to visitor’s expenses for her mother to visit from China, which were denied by the insurer. Vice Chair Marzinotto noted the conflicting evidence on file, including the claimant’s contradictory reports of the accident to the IE assessors. A review of the medical information on file was not supportive of the expenses being necessary as a result of the accident. In particular, Vice Chair Marzinotto noted a section 25 progress report from Dr. Pilowsky authored in 2019, after the claimant’s mother had visited, in which Dr. Pilowsky noted that the claimant was struggling to talk about the accident with her parents and had avoided telling them about it. The treatment records indicated that the claimant reported moderate pain and headaches. She was given a prescription for medication, but never filled it. Vice Chair Marzinotto held that the evidence showed that the visits by the claimant’s mother were not accident-related, especially considering that the mother was not even aware that an accident had occurred at the time of her two visits. Furthermore, the claimant did not provide a statement from her mother related to the reasons for her visits, or provide proof of payment for the airplane tickets. The application was dismissed.

Full decision here

TGP Analysis

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vestibulum placerat ex vitae dui dignissim, in iaculis tellus venenatis. Nam aliquet mauris eros. Mauris vitae justo sit amet nisi dictum euismod in sed nisl. Donec blandit, justo eu pellentesque sodales, eros urna dignissim tortor, non imperdiet enim massa ut orci. Pellentesque id lacus viverra, consectetur neque ac, congue lorem.

PrevPrevious Case
Next CaseNext
  • FILED UNDER Visitor Expenses
SHARE

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1800

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com

  • Areas of Practice
  • Mediation
  • Our Lawyers
  • News
  • Case Summaries
  • Careers

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1800

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com

© 2020 Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Statement of Principles

Powered by Crow & Pitcher

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1800

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com