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.

September 8, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.A. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-004334)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs in the amount of $195.81 per week, the cost of an IRB calculation report, interest and a special award. The claimant submitted that from March 9, 2016 to April 30, 2016, he suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment as a floor installer...

September 3, 2020

/

tgp-admin

Aviva Insurance Canada v. K.B. (19-008307)

The claimant was involved in an accident on November 10, 2015. The insurer paid the claimant IRBs from November 17, 2015 until December 10, 2018, based upon the OCF-1 and OCF-2 submitted by the claimant. The insurer terminated IRBs based upon multiple IE reports. The claimant disputed the insurer's termination and in turn provided tax...

September 2, 2020

/

tgp-admin

K.G. v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (19-006535)

The claimant withdrew her LAT Application on June 7, 2019, three days before the scheduled written hearing. On June 18, 2019, the claimant filed another Application disputing the same medical/rehabilitation benefits (but without the original claim for income replacement benefits or attendant care). At the case conference, the insurer raised a preliminary issue that the...

September 2, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.M. v Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (18-010866)

The insurer brought a preliminary motion to bar the claimant from proceeding with his dispute as he did not attend multiple IEs. Adjudicator Moten held that the respondent's requests for IEs to assess the claimant's entitlement to benefits were reasonable and that the claimant could not proceed with his LAT dispute.

September 2, 2020

/

tgp-admin

Y.G. v. TD General Insurance Company (18-012431)

The claimant sought entitlement to the cost of psychological and orthopaedic assessments. The insurer argued that the disputes were barred by the limitation period. The insurer denied the claimed assessments by letter dated March 1, 2016 due to insufficient medical documentation to support injuries outside of the MIG. The letter also advised the claimant that...

September 2, 2020

/

tgp-admin

M.C. and M.C. v. Pembridge Insurance Company (18-006473 and 18-006682)

The husband and wife claimants were involved in a motorcycle accident and required amputation of their right legs. Both claimants were entitled to catastrophic impairment level benefits. Because the cost of both the claimant's and insurer's plan outpaced the cost of building a new home, neither plan was carried out. Instead, a new home was...

August 31, 2020

/

tgp-admin

G.R. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-004375)

Both the claimant and the insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision awarding seven medical benefits, denying attendant care expenses, and granting a special award on a functional impairment assessment, which had been deemed incurred. The claimant argued that ACBs should have been awarded and should have been deemed incurred under section 3(8). Adjudicator Mazerolle...

August 28, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.S. v. The Personal Insurance Company (19-004026)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and removal from the MIG. Adjudicator Lake concluded that the claimant was not entitled to IRBs, but that his injuries fell outside of the MIG. With regard to IRBs, the claimant failed to prove that he was substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment. A...

August 27, 2020

/

tgp-admin

L.A. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (19-007357)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs. While he was unemployed at the time of the accident, he argued that he was receiving EI benefits. The insurer argued that the claimant's EI benefits had expired one week before the accident and he was therefore not entitled to IRBs. Adjudicator Johal agreed with the insurer. The claimant...

August 26, 2020

/

tgp-admin

J.T. v. Primmum Insurance Company (18-009043)

The self-represented claimant argued that he suffered a catastrophic impairment following a collision in a parking lot. The insurer's position was that the claimant suffered a minor injury. Adjudicator Manigat concluded that the claimant suffered a minor injury and dismissed the catastrophic impairment determination. No medical evidence was provided by the claimant in support of...

August 26, 2020

/

tgp-admin

B.S. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (19-001828)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to physiotherapy and two assessments. Adjudicator Maleki-Yazdi found that the claimant's injuries fell outside of the MIG and that the claimant was entitled to all three treatment plans. Additionally, she concluded that the insurer's section 38 notices were deficient. All three denials were similarly worded and...

August 26, 2020

/

tgp-admin

A.G.S. v. Echelon General Insurance Company (18-001994)

The claimant was a fetus in utero at the time of the accident and born prematurely four days after the accident. She was diagnosed with cerebral palsy as a result of her premature birth. The insurer initially paid accident benefits based on a medical opinion, but subsequently questioned causation based on an opinion of an...

August 25, 2020

/

tgp-admin

D.L. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (19-001860)

The claimant sought entitlement to CAT assessments totalling more than $26,000, as well as four treatment plans for passive physical therapy, and a psychological assessment. Vice Chair Farlam rejected the claims. While accepting that assessments are speculative in nature, the claimant failed to prove that there was any reasonable basis to investigate whether the he...

August 21, 2020

/

tgp-admin

M.V. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-011523)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and removal from the MIG. Vice Chair Farlam concluded that the claimant was not entitled to IRBs and that his injuries fell within the MIG. The medical evidence provided showed only soft tissue injuries, and insufficient objective evidence was led regarding chronic pain or psychological impairment. There were also...

August 21, 2020

/

tgp-admin

N.V. v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (18-008774)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that the limitation barred the IRB claim and that section 7 of the LAT Act should not apply to extend the limitation period. Adjudicator Boyce rejected the reconsideration request. He held that no error was made by the Tribunal in concluding that the insurer's denial was clear...

August 21, 2020

/

tgp-admin

N.V. v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (18-008774)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that the limitation barred the IRB claim and that section 7 of the LAT Act should not apply to extend the limitation period. Adjudicator Boyce rejected the reconsideration request. He held that no error was made by the Tribunal in concluding that the insurer's denial was clear...

August 20, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.W. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (19-002127)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision to allow the claimant to extend the limitation period under section 7 of the LAT Act. The insurer argued that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to extend the limitation period, or alternatively, that the facts of the case did not warrant the extension. Adjudicator Boyce dismissed...

August 19, 2020

/

tgp-admin

B.A. v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company (18-005968)

The insurer denied the claim for IRBs pursuant to section 31(1)(b), arguing that the claimant had made a material misrepresentation that induced the insurer to enter into the contract. In particular, the claimant allegedly misrepresented her address for the purpose of obtaining a lower premium. As a preliminary issue, the claimant sought to exclude audio...

August 17, 2020

/

tgp-admin

H.K.C. v. Aviva Insurance Company (18-011956)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that a formal psychological diagnosis was not required for removal from the MIG. Adjudicator Johal dismissed the reconsideration. She found no error in the Tribunal's decision and noted that the Supreme Court's decision in Saadati v Moorhead supported the conclusion. She also rejected the insurer's argument that...

August 17, 2020

/

tgp-admin

F.C. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-001359)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision awarding NEBs and a treatment plan for failure to comply with sections 36 and 38, respectively. Adjudicator Boyce dismissed the reconsideration. He held that Stranges v Allstate was not good law in relation to the current version of the SABS, which required payment of NEBs until a...

August 17, 2020

/

tgp-admin

P.M. v. Aviva General Insurance (18-009518)

The insurer was paying the claimant IRBs for over a year after the accident when it suspended IRBs due to the claimant's failure to obtain necessary treatment and in providing relevant information under section 33 (the status of recommended psychological treatments and the updated clinical notes and records from the family physician). IRBs were reinstated...

Contact Us

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

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com

Contact Us

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

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

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com