• 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
June 14, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (17-004147)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to IRBs and various medical benefits. The insurer argued that the claimant failed to attend an IE, which barred payment of further IRBs. Adjudicator Norris concluded that the claimant did not suffer pre-existing conditions that would prevent recovery under the MIG and that the claimant did...
Read More
June 14, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Oliver v. Brant Mutual Insurance Company (2018 ONSC 3716)

The claimant sought judicial review of the Tribunal's decision that a 2005 denial of attendant care benefits was clear and unequivocal and started the limitation clock. The claimant argued that because the insurer had not requested a Form 1, nor had a Form 1 been submitted, the denial was premature. The Court dismissed the appeal...
Read More
June 13, 2018
/
tgp-admin

M.R. v Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005284)

The insurer denied payment for non-earner benefits. The applicant appealed and sought payment of NEBs. Adjudicator Sewrattan held that the applicant was not entitled to NEBs as she did not prove she was continuously prevented from engaging in substantially all of her pre-accident activities. The adjudicator relied on the applicant's statements to IE assessors that...
Read More
June 13, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (17-006563)

The claimant had purchased optional benefits set out at section 28(1) 5 of the SABS and sought entitlement to payment of case management services, despite not suffering a catastrophic impairment. The insurer argued that case management services were only available if the claimant suffered a catastrophic impairment. Adjudicator Parish agreed with the insurer. She held...
Read More
June 11, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Security National Insurance Company v. Kumar (2018 ONSC 3556)

The insurer sought judicial review of the LAT's decision that the claimant was a resident of Ontario at the time of the accident. The claimant had been involved in an accident in Alberta, and only applied for Ontario accident benefits after exhausting Alberta benefits. The Court dismissed the appeal. The Court held that the LAT's...
Read More
June 7, 2018
/
tgp-admin

D.M. v Aviva Insurance (17-003463)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs, attendant care, two medical benefits, interest, and costs. Adjudicator Johal found the claimant's complaints of pain to be credible, but did not find that his pain-related restrictions equated to a complete inability to carry on a normal life; as such, the claimant's entitlement to NEBs was denied. However, Adjudicator...
Read More
June 7, 2018
/
tgp-admin

I.K. v. Coseco Insurance Company (17-004897)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to medical benefits proposed in five treatment plans. The claimant argued that he should be removed from the MIG due to psychological impairments, chronic pain, and pre-existing migraines and left wrist/arm pain. Adjudicator Boyce found that pursuant to s. 55(1)2...
Read More
June 7, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-007036)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs, occupational therapy treatment, the cost of an in-home occupational therapy assessment, and a special award. The respondent submitted that the claimant was barred from filing a LAT application due to failure to attend a s. 44 assessment, pursuant to s. 55 of the SABS. The s. 44 assessment had...
Read More
June 7, 2018
/
tgp-admin

G.V. v. Northbridge General Insurance (16-001698)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision to issue a special award on medical benefits after the insurer removed the claimant from the MIG. Associate Chair Batty allowed granted the reconsideration and cancelled the special award. He held that the insurer's approval of benefits in advance of a hearing was insufficient to warrant a...
Read More
June 6, 2018
/
tgp-admin

A.C. v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company (17-005685)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs. The insurer argued that the claimant failed to dispute entitlement within two years of the denial. The claimant conceded that he had not disputed entitlement within two years, but argued that his claim was not discoverable during the period. Adjudicator Go held that the principles of discoverability did not...
Read More
June 6, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva General Insurance (17-005010)

The insurer denied the claimant's entitlement to certain attendant care benefits. The claimant disputed the insurer's denial and argued that the payments were unreasonably withheld or delayed. With respect to the period of time from when the first Form 1 was provided by the claimant to the time when the claimant started to incur attendant...
Read More
June 6, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance (17-002589)

The claimant sought entitlement to various medical benefits outside of the MIG. Adjudicator Sohal found that the claimant was outside of the MIG due to a pre-existing back injury that would prevent her from achieving maximal recovery if she were subjected to the MIG limits. The claimant had had three back surgeries prior to the...
Read More
June 5, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005667)

The insurer denied a number of treatment plans and costs of three assessments based on its finding that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG. Adjudicator Boyce found that the claimant suffered from chronic pain which entitled him to treatment beyond the MIG. All of the medical benefits for physiotherapy were found reasonable and necessary....
Read More
June 4, 2018
/
tgp-admin

S.S. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005998)

The insurer denied the claimant's entitlement to medical benefits for chiropractic treatment based on its finding that her injuries fell within the MIG. Arbitrator Grant held that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG. As such, the claimant was not entitled to the medical benefits in dispute. Arbitrator Grant noted that while the clinical notes...
Read More
June 4, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (17-005179)

The insurer denied medical benefits for physiotherapy, the cost of an orthopedic assessment, and the cost of a chronic pain assessment based on its finding that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG. The insurer also terminated the claimant's income replacement benefit approximately nine months after the accident on the recommendations made in three IE...
Read More
June 1, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005672)

The insurer denied entitlement to medical benefits for chiropractic services and the cost of a psychological assessment based on its finding that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG. Adjudicator Kepman held that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG and therefore the treatment plans at issue were not payable. The claimant argued that a...
Read More
June 1, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (17-005427)

The claimant sought entitlement to an income replacement benefit from the time the benefit was terminated approximately one year and one month following the accident onward, and entitlement to medical benefits for chiropractic services, psychological services, and custom orthotics. Adjudicator Sewrattan held that the claimant was not entitled to any of the benefits in dispute....
Read More
June 1, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v Coachman Insurance Company (17-004906)

The self-employed claimant and insurer disagreed about the quantum of IRBs; the claimant also sought interest on medical benefits approved shortly before the hearing, and a special award. Adjudicator Victor held that it was reasonable to base IRB calculations on the year prior's gross business income as contemplated in s.4(3) of the SABS, and as...
Read More
June 1, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006757)

The insurer approved and paid NEBs and medical benefits shortly before a hearing. The claimant argued that he was still entitled to a special award. The insurer argued that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to make the award since all benefits had been paid. Adjudicator Paluch agreed with the claimant that the Tribunal had jurisdiction...
Read More
May 31, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v Aviva Insurance Canada (17-007873)

The claimant sought medical benefits for chiropractic treatment. Adjudicator Kershaw held that the claimant was not entitled to the treatment because she did not prove that the treatment plan was reasonable and necessary. The claimant's treating physician only recommended a splint and possible surgery for her left hand and stated that additional massage therapy could...
Read More
May 30, 2018
/
tgp-admin

Applicant v Peel Mutual Insurance Company (17-003087)

The claimant sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits, costs of moving, and interest on the overdue payment of benefits. Adjudicator Parish held that the claimant did not demonstrate that the medical/rehabilitation benefits in dispute for physical therapy and online classes were reasonable and necessary. The treatment plans for online courses were premature at the time...
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

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