• Areas of Practice
  • Our Lawyers
  • News
  • Case Summaries
    • LAT Law Cases
    • Commercial/Tort Law Cases
Menu
  • Areas of Practice
  • Our Lawyers
  • News
  • Case Summaries
    • LAT Law Cases
    • Commercial/Tort Law Cases

LAT Case Law Summaries

Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP is pleased to provide this online resource to our clients. Below is a searchable database of the publicly released decisions from the Licence Appeal Tribunal. Assembled by the accident benefits group, the decisions are reviewed, briefly summarized, and categorized for easy access.

As of March 2020, we will not include any further decisions focused solely on the Minor Injury Guideline or treatment plans, unless the case may have broader applicability.

Search
Generic filters
July 16, 2020
/
tgp-admin

J.A. v. Intact Insurance Company (19-005110)

The claimant disputed two treatment plans and sought removal from the MIG. The insurer requested IEs, which the claimant did not attend. Adjudicator Farlam held that the claimant was barred from proceeding with the dispute. She rejected the argument that the insurer could not request an IE to address the MIG. He unreasonably failed to...
Read More
July 15, 2020
/
tgp-admin

N.M. v. The Guarantee Company of North America (18-009017)

The claimant filed for reconsideration of the Tribunal's award of $1,000 in costs to the insurer. Vice Chair Hunter denied the reconsideration. Costs had been awarded after the claimant twice withdrew his dispute on the eve of the scheduled hearing. He rejected the claimant's arguments that the Tribunal exhibited bias or that it made its...
Read More
July 14, 2020
/
tgp-admin

S.J. v. Allstate Canada (19-001156)

The claimant sought entitlement to ACBs. The insurer argued that the claim was barred by the limitation period. Adjudicator Johal agreed that the claim was brought after the expiry of the limitation period, but extended the limitation period under section 7 of the LAT Act. The claimant showed a bona fide intention to dispute future...
Read More
July 14, 2020
/
tgp-admin

V.A.D. v. Intact Insurance Company (19-003332)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs. The insurer argued that the section 31(b) exclusion applied because the claimant intentionally failed to notify the insurer of a material change in risk. The claimant had moved from Quebec to Ontario but did not notify the insurer; the insurer argued that this resulted in the claimant lower premiums...
Read More
July 10, 2020
/
tgp-admin

D.M.A.M. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (19-005566)

The claimant sought entitlement to ACBs. Adjudicator Johal concluded that attendant care benefits were not reasonable and necessary. The claimant did not submit contemporaneous evidence showing that the claimant had limitations or restrictions that would require assistance with activities of daily living, and no treatment providers recommended personal care. Further, the claimant's pain complaints were...
Read More
July 10, 2020
/
tgp-admin

O.D. v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (19-008965)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs. The insurer argued that the dispute was barred by the limitation period. Adjudicator Johal concluded that the claimant was out of time to dispute NEBs. Although the denial of NEBs was not technically correct (the claimant, as a self-employed person, could nevertheless claim NEBs), the denial did not need...
Read More
July 9, 2020
/
tgp-admin

A.N. v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (19-000685)

Following her removal from the MIG, the claimant sought entitlement to ACBs. The claimant conceded that she did not incur and attendant care expenses, but argued that the expenses should be deemed incurred because she was kept in the MIG until the Case Conference which was after the 104 week mark and the insurer failed...
Read More
July 9, 2020
/
tgp-admin

K.D. v. TD Insurance Meloche Monnex (18-008965)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that she was barred from pursuing her claim for caregiver benefits and housekeeping expenses. Adjudicator Norris rejected the reconsideration request. He reiterated that the insurer was not required to wait for a new Disability Certificate before requesting an IE, and that the IE report did not need...
Read More
July 8, 2020
/
tgp-admin

C.K. v. TD General Insurance Company (18-007496)

The claimant sought a determination that she suffered a catastrophic impairment. She suffered serious physical injuries as a pedestrian struck by a vehicle. Vice Chair Flude held that the claimant suffered a Class 4 marked impairment in adaptation and therefore had a catastrophic impairment. The claimant was largely housebound since the accident due to tiredness...
Read More
July 8, 2020
/
tgp-admin

A.L. v. Unica Insurance Inc. (18-008890)

The claimant sought a determination of a catastrophic impairment based on a WPI in excess of 55 percent. He also sought entitlement to ACBs, the denied portion of CAT assessments, and various medical benefits. Adjudicator Lake concluded that the claimant did not suffer a catastrophic impairment. She rejected the claimant's experts opinions on WPI for...
Read More
July 7, 2020
/
tgp-admin

C.A. v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (19-005816)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs. The insurer argued that the dispute was initiated beyond the two year limitation period. The claimant applied to the LAT two days late because of an earlier faxing error. The insurer was provided with the LAT application 10 days thereafter. Adjudicator Johal held that the dispute was not brought...
Read More
July 6, 2020
/
tgp-admin

T.A. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-006820)

The Tribunal awarded NEBs, a psychological assessment, and a 25 percent special award. The Tribunal had ordered the insurer to pay NEBs due to its failure to respond to the claimant's application, and such order required the insurer to pay NEBs before the conclusion of the 26 week waiting period. The insurer sought reconsideration. Adjudicator...
Read More
July 6, 2020
/
tgp-admin

T.A. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-006820)

The Tribunal awarded NEBs, a psychological assessment, and a 25 percent special award. The Tribunal had ordered the insurer to pay NEBs due to its failure to respond to the claimant's application, and such order required the insurer to pay NEBs before the conclusion of the 26 week waiting period. The insurer sought reconsideration. Adjudicator...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

M.M. v. Aviva General Insurance (19-002201)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and three medical benefits. Adjudicator Chakravarti held that the claimant was not entitled to any of the claimed benefits. She found that the claimant was not credible, and that insufficient evidence was put forward to show that the claimant was working or had worked 26 of the past 52...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

F.M. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-008127)

The claimant sought entitlement to post-104 week IRBs. Adjudicator Létourneau concluded that the claimant did not meet the complete inability test and denied the claim. The claimant's background and education qualified him for manual labour type positions, but not customer-service type jobs due to lack of English language skills. The adjudicator concluded that the claimant...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

Y.R. v. Coachman Insurance Company (19-006234)

The claimant disputed a determination of catastrophic impairment and entitlement to attendant care benefits. The insurer argued that the claimant failed to attend an IE and was barred from proceeding with the hearing. Adjudicator Chakravarti permitted the claimant to proceed. The request for the IE to address attendant care benefits was not made in accordance...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

Z.A. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (19-001119)

The claimant sought entitlement to transportation expenses and a special award. Adjudicator Boyce dismissed both claims. The claimant failed to provide evidence regarding the transportation expenses, her home address, the address of the clinic, or an invoice for the transportation. Looking to the OCF-18, the longest one-way route between the addresses listed was well under...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

A.A.J. v. Echelon General Insurance Company (19-000961)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs for a one month period when he was in non-compliance with IE requests, and a treatment plan for chiropractic services. Adjudicator Boyce rejected all of the excuses provided by the claimant for his non-attendance as being unreasonable or not believable. The insurer rescheduled the IEs on multiple occasions and...
Read More
July 3, 2020
/
tgp-admin

H.A. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-012325)

The claimant sought entitlement to the cost of an EMG study. Adjudicator Hines concluded that the insurer's section 38 notice was non-compliant because it was too vague. However, the EMG study had been incurred 10 days (rather than 10 business days) after submission of the OCF-18. Because it was incurred too soon after submission of...
Read More
July 2, 2020
/
tgp-admin

D.L. v. Aviva Insurance Company (17-006056)

The claimant initially disputed entitlement to various assessments which were denied based on the MIG. The insurer later approved the assessments following an IE which concluded that the claimant suffered a psychological impairment as a result of the accident. The claimant requested a special award based on the earlier denials. Adjudicator Goela granted a special...
Read More
June 30, 2020
/
tgp-admin

B.M. v. Aviva Insurance (18-009182)

The Tribunal had awarded two of three treatment plans for chiropractic services, and denied the third as being duplicative. The claimant sought reconsideration on the denied treatment plan; the insurer sought reconsideration of the two approved treatment plans. Adjudicator Johal dismissed the claimant's reconsideration request and attempt to introduce new evidence. Adjudicator Johal granted the...
Read More
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99

Contact Us

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

416.507.1800

416.507.1850

smilne@tgplawyers.com

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

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

Powered by Crow & Pitcher

Subscribe to get TGP’s case summaries straight to your inbox

Subscribe to get TGP’s case summaries straight to your inbox

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

Contact Us

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

416.507.1800

416.507.1850

smilne@tgplawyers.com

  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Statement of Principles

© 2020 Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP