The claimant requested productions from SOMA Medical Assessment. SOMA was a third party who had concluded in its s. 44 assessments that the claimant’s injuries were not catastrophic. In the Case Conference for the matter, the adjudicator released an Order dated November 6, 2018 requiring the insurer to produce SOMA’s complete file as it pertained to the claimant. The insurer then requested these records from SOMA, who refused to produce the documents. In their letter to the insurer dated February 1, 2019, SOMA stated that the Case Conference Order required the insurer, and not SOMA, to produce these documents, and moreover, that the LAT could not order a third party to produce the documents. The claimant then brought a Motion for an Order to compel SOMA to produce their file as a third party. In her Order dated May 7, 2019, Adjudicator Helt acknowledged that the LAT did not have the power to order productions from a third party under the Tribunal’s Rules. However, Adjudicator Helt noted that the present matter involved a CAT application which required complex examinations of medical documents. Relying on obiter comments from the ONCA’s decision Ontario (Human Rights Commission) v. Dofasco Inc., and the decisions reached in two LAT cases, 17-00777 v. Aviva General Insurance and 17-007223 v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company, Adjudicator Helt reasoned that the production of documents in advance of a hearing would prevent adjournments and was aligned with the SPPA’s scheme to ensure just, expeditious, and cost-effective determination of each matter on its merits. She relied on section 2 of the SPPA to order SOMA to produce its file to the Claimant by May 24, 2019.
Menu