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.

July 4, 2019

/

tgp-admin

M.D.H. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (17-007887)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the decision that his injuries fell within the MIG. Adjudicator Neilson dismissed the reconsideration request. She was not persuaded that the Tribunal made a significant error of law or fact, or acted outside its jurisdiction or violated the rules of procedural fairness. She wrote that the Tribunal applied the correct...

July 3, 2019

/

tgp-admin

C.H. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-002710)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to medical benefits for psychological treatment. Adjudicator Go concluded that the claimant suffered psychological injuries as a result of the accident. The treatment for psychological therapy was reasonable and necessary.

July 2, 2019

/

tgp-admin

Certas Direct Insurance Company v. K.P. (18-005710)

The insurer sought repayment of IRBs alleging that the claimant had misrepresented his work status for a period of seven months. Adjudicator Parish accepted that the claimant was working during the seven month period he was receiving IRBs, and that the claimant wilfully misrepresented his work status in signing an OCF-13 which stated he had...

June 21, 2019

/

tgp-admin

Shuttleworth v. Ontario (Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunal) (2019 ONCA 518)

The Tribunal and the insurer appealed the Divisional Court's decision that there was a reasonable apprehension of lack of adjudicative independence. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and held that the Divisional Court had correctly applied the case law regarding adjudicative independence. The dispute was remitted to the Tribunal for a new hearing on...

June 5, 2019

/

tgp-admin

E.B. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-010159)

The claimant sought entitlement to acupuncture, massage, and chiropractic therapy, a social work assessment, an in-home assessment, the cost for the production of a disability certificate, and interest on the overdue payment of benefits. Adjudicator Norris did not find the disputed treatment, assessments, and cost for the production of a disability certificate to be reasonable...

June 5, 2019

/

tgp-admin

A.B. v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada(18-000935)

At the case conference, the Adjudicator ordered the issues in dispute to be heard by way of a written hearing. After the respondent filed their submissions, in which it requested costs, the claimant withdrew their application from the Tribunal. The Tribunal proceeded to close the file without hearing the request for costs. The respondent sought...

May 31, 2019

/

tgp-admin

U.P. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (19-007557)

The claimant sought entitlement to two treatment plans, a chronic pain assessment and physiotherapy treatment. Adjudicator Kaur found that the claimant was entitled to both benefits. The evidence supported that the claimant continued to suffer from ongoing pain and impairment. With respect to the chronic pain assessment, the Adjudicator preferred the claimant's evidence and held...

May 30, 2019

/

tgp-admin

G.C. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-003450)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that the claimant was entitled to a chronic pain assessment, arguing that the Tribunal failed to consider if the proposed assessor was properly qualified and failed to apply significant weight to the respondent's paper review IE report. Adjudicator Grieves dismissed the request for reconsideration. She held that...

May 30, 2019

/

tgp-admin

M.H. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006910)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision to award death benefits, on the basis that the deceased was a dependent for care on the claimant. Associate Chair Jovanovic granted the reconsideration and ordered a new hearing. He wrote that the Tribunal failed to consider whether the deceased was "principally" dependent on the claimant and...

May 28, 2019

/

tgp-admin

A.O. v. Unifund Assurance Company (18-003798)

This preliminary issue hearing was brought to determine whether the claimant was statute barred from proceeding with her claim for IRBs because she failed to apply within the two year limitation period after its refusal to pay IRBs. The claimant conceded that she did not file her application within the two year limitation period, and...

May 27, 2019

/

tgp-admin

M.R. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-008917)

The claimant sought entitlement to two treatment plans, a chronic pain assessment and a neurological assessment. Adjudicator Makhamra found that the claimant was entitled to both benefits. In terms of the chronic pain assessment, the claimant's family doctor records contained persistent complaints of pain resulting from the accident-related injuries. The Adjudicator assigned little weight to...

May 27, 2019

/

tgp-admin

S.G. v. Aviva General Insurance (18-007668)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to two treatment plans, one for psychological treatment and another for an orthopaedic assessment. Adjudicator Braun concluded that the claimant's physical injuries were minor, but that he had sustained a psychological injury which exempted him from the MIG limit. The...

May 27, 2019

/

tgp-admin

P.D. v. Western Assurance Company (17-005066)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that the limitation period did not bar the claims for attendant care benefits and medical benefits. Associate Chair Batty granted the reconsideration, reasoning that the denials were "clear and unequivocal." The denials were based on the claimant having exhausted her non-catastrophic medical benefits limits.

May 24, 2019

/

tgp-admin

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

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision to award ACBs beyond the 104 week mark despite the claimant not being designated catastrophically impaired, and the decision to deem the attendant care services incurred. Adjudicator Boyce granted the reconsideration. He held that the Tribunal made a significant error of law in awarding ACBs beyond the...

May 23, 2019

/

tgp-admin

T.C. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-008107)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that she was not entitled to IRBs. Adjudicator Boyce dismissed the reconsideration request. He held that the claimant's arguments amounted to an attempt to re-argue the case and reweigh the evidence and credibility, which was not the purpose of a reconsideration. He also held that a new...

May 23, 2019

/

tgp-admin

K.B. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (17-009088)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs. Adjudicator Punyarthi dismissed the claim. He held that the claimant did not meet the "complete inability" test, and that the evidence submitted did not provide an in-depth assessment of the claimant's pre-accident and post-accident activities or how he was practically prevented from engaging in the activities that were most...

May 23, 2019

/

tgp-admin

L.K.C. v. Unifund Assurance Company (18-004346)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's order to produce adjusting log notes. Adjudicator Marzinotto dismissed the reconsideration request. She held that the Tribunal did not make a significant error of law, and that the log notes were relevant to the issues in dispute. She also noted that there was no legal requirement that a...

May 17, 2019

/

tgp-admin

C.D. v. Aviva General Insurance (17-005825)

The Tribunal had awarded the claimant all claimed medical benefits in her application, and a 25 percent special award. The insurer sought reconsideration, arguing that it had paid amounts to the clinics for the medical benefits, so that any payments to the claimant was double recovery. The insurer also argued that the special award was...

May 16, 2019

/

tgp-admin

T.K. v. Allstate Insurance (18-007113)

The claimant sought an order for interim benefits pending the LAT hearing. The insurer argued that the LAT did not have jurisdiction to award interim benefits. Adjudicator Letourneau agreed with the insurer and held that he did not have jurisdiction to award interim benefits. When read together, none of the Insurance Act, the Statutory Powers...

May 16, 2019

/

tgp-admin

A.P. v. Coachman Insurance Company (17-004906)

The Tribunal had awarded the claimant IRBs for a specific quantum and specific time period; the Tribunal also awarded interest on medical benefits. The insurer sought reconsideration, arguing that the decision did not accurately reflect the timeframe for payment of IRBs and when interest became payable. Adjudicator Lester partially granted the reconsideration request. She held...

May 16, 2019

/

tgp-admin

J.L. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (18-000766)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that he did not suffer a catastrophic impairment under the Glasgow Coma Scale. He argued that the Tribunal should have admitted video evidence of the paramedic administering the GCS. Adjudicator Boyce agreed with the Tribunal that the video had limited probative value and was unlikely to change...

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