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

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.

May 1, 2019
/
tgp-admin

E.D. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-002597)

The claimant sought entitlement to the remainder of a partially approved treatment plan for physical therapy and gym equipment, and a special award. Adjudicator Lake awarded the remainder of the treatment plan, but declined to grant a special award. She held that the proposed treatment was reasonable for pain reduction, increase in strength and range...
Read More
April 30, 2019
/
tgp-admin

V.D. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-007435)

This is a preliminary issue decision addressing the following issues: 1) whether the claimant was statute barred from applying to the LAT for non-earner benefits for failure to attend a s. 44 OT assessment, and 2) whether the claimant was barred from proceeding with her claim for payment of a psychological assessment. Adjudicator Ferguson held...
Read More
April 30, 2019
/
tgp-admin

R.T. v. The Economical Group (17-008069)

The claimant was catastrophically impaired as a result of an accident and sought a determination that she was entitled to receive home modifications and home devices in the amount of $415,334.00. The insurer agree that home renovations were required but disputed the scope and quantum of the proposed benefits. Adjudicator Grieves found that the proposed...
Read More
April 29, 2019
/
tgp-admin

V.K. v. Unica Insurance Inc. (18-007227)

This is a preliminary issue decision on whether the cost of assessments to determine catastrophic impairment falls within the $50,000.00 limit on medical and rehabilitation benefits. Adjudicator Ferguson concurred with previous decisions that CAT assessments are not a benefit, and found that the insurer is obliged to pay the full cost of CAT assessments subject...
Read More
April 29, 2019
/
tgp-admin

D.S. v. The Personal Insurance Company (18-001204)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to a s. 25 psychology assessment. The insurer raised the preliminary issue of whether the claimant was statute barred from applying to the LAT for the psychology assessment because he failed to attend a s. 44 examination. The claimant was...
Read More
April 26, 2019
/
tgp-admin

D.0. v. Primmum Insurance Company (18-001673)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to two treatment plans for physiotherapy. The claimant submitted that the he developed chronic pain as a result of the accident. In support of his position, he relied on three OCF-3s, a s. 25 chronic pain report, and family doctor...
Read More
April 26, 2019
/
tgp-admin

H.K. v. The Commonwealth Mutual Insurance Group (18-005647)

The claimant sought production of log notes from the date of the first FSCO arbitration application up to the date of the LAT application. The insurer argued that these notes were protected by privilege. Adjudicator Fricot concluded that the log notes between the date of the FSCO arbitration application up to the date of the...
Read More
April 25, 2019
/
tgp-admin

F.D. v. Allstate Canada (17-006372)

The claimant sought a determination that she had sustained a catastrophic impairment as a result of the accident. The parties disputed causation with respect to the claimant's impairments. Adjudicator Daoud confirmed that the "but for" test is the proper test for causation in accident benefits cases. Adjudicator Daoud found that "but for" the accident the...
Read More
April 24, 2019
/
tgp-admin

V.R. v . Aviva Insurance Company (18-0028800)

The claimant sought entitlement to passive chiropractic treatment and a chronic pain assessment. Vice Chair Flude found that the proposed treatment and assessment were not reasonable and necessary. Vice Chair Flude found that the medical records supported the IE assessor's opinion that an active exercise program, rather than passive treatment, was required.
Read More
April 24, 2019
/
tgp-admin

B.E. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-005760)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to a various medical benefits. Vice Chair Kershaw found that the claimant established that she had a psychological injury and chronic pain injuries, and was therefore not subject to the $3500 MIG limit. Based on these findings, the adjudicator concluded...
Read More
April 23, 2019
/
tgp-admin

P.M. v. ACE INA Insurance Company (18-002377)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision which declined to remove the insurer's counsel of record. The claimant argued that because the firm representing the insurer had also represented one of the defendants in the earlier tort action, a conflict existed. Vice Chair Helt concluded that the Tribunal did not make an error and...
Read More
April 18, 2019
/
tgp-admin

The Applicant by his Guardian, K. R. v. Unifund Assurance Company (18-001975)

The claimant was catastrophically impaired in a motor vehicle accident in August 2017, and remained in a coma until the date of his death on September 11, 2018. The claimant claimed for legal fees incurred in obtaining a guardianship order, arguing that the legal fees were a rehabilitative benefit. The respondent argued that the legal...
Read More
April 18, 2019
/
tgp-admin

S.M. v. Certas Direct Insurance Company (18-000426 and 18-000423)

The claimant requested reconsideration of a Motion Order, in which Vice Chair Hunter granted the respondent's motion to adjourn a written hearing scheduled for December 2018. The claimant submitted that reconsideration was warranted because the Tribunal erred in granting an adjournment in respect of the addition of treatment plans when none were in issue, the...
Read More
April 18, 2019
/
tgp-admin

H.A. v. Intact Insurance Company (18-002501)

The claimant, an Uber driver, was assaulted while waiting in his car to pick up passengers. The claimant sustained injuries as a result of the attack, and applied for accident benefits. The insurer denied coverage on the basis that the incident was not an "accident" under the SABS. Adjudicator Johal agreed. He concluded that the...
Read More
April 5, 2019
/
tgp-admin

P.Z. v. Unifund Claims Inc. (18-004786)

The claimant brought a motion for the production of log notes; the insurer brought a motion for productions of various clinical notes and records. Adjudicator Hines granted both motions. She ordered the log notes up to the date of the IRB denial to be produced subject to redactions for litigation privilege and solicitor-client privilege. She...
Read More
April 4, 2019
/
tgp-admin

A.A. v. Aviva Insurance Company (17-008472 and 17-004680)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's denial of the cost of a chronic pain assessment. Vice Chair Trojek concluded that the Tribunal did not make an error in fact such that it would likely have reached a different result had the error not been made. The reconsideration request was dismissed.
Read More
April 3, 2019
/
tgp-admin

C.L. v. Aviva General Insurance (17-004389)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's award of ongoing IRBs based on psychological impairment. Vice Chair Hunter dismissed the reconsideration request. He concluded that the Tribunal provided careful and detailed reasons for its decision, and that there was no basis to interfere with it. He also wrote that the Tribunal correctly found that the...
Read More
March 28, 2019
/
tgp-admin

H.A. v. Travelers Insurance (18-005178)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs, removal from the MIG, and three medical benefits. Adjudicator Lake concluded that the claimant had proven entitlement to only three months of IRBs, but that his injuries fell within the MIG. The remainder of the MIG limits was awarded on one of the treatment plans.
Read More
March 4, 2019
/
tgp-admin

L.L. v. Intact Insurance Company (17-003125)

The claimant was injured when a motorist deliberately hit her with the door of his parked car. The motorist then got out of the vehicle and struck the claimant several times. The insurer argued that there were two separate incidents, and that it was not liable to pay for injuries related to the second assault....
Read More
February 28, 2019
/
tgp-admin

Traders General Insurance Company v. Rumball (2019 ONSC 1412)

The insurer appealed the Tribunal's decision that the claimant was not barred by the limitation period from seeking IRBs. The Court held that the appeal to Divisional Court was premature, and that the matter should proceed at the Tribunal regarding the claimant's entitlement to IRBs. If IRBs were awarded, the insurer could then appeal the...
Read More
February 27, 2019
/
tgp-admin

E.K. v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Company (18-001333)

The claimant sought entitlement to four medical benefits. Adjudicator Ferguson dismissed the claims. He held that the proposed assessments were not reasonable and necessary, and that the proposed treatment was not proven to be related to an accident-related impairment.
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 Page 100

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