The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision granting a special award of 35% on IRBs. The insurer argued that the Tribunal erred in finding that the insurer received the claimant’s employment file in August of 2018, his CPP file by March 12, 2018, and his tax returns by August 2018. The insurer argued that Adjudicator Neilson made significant errors of fact in determining that it received emails enclosing these documents, when no email confirmation receipts were filed by the claimant. Adjudicator Neilson noted that, upon review of correspondence in the file, that the claimant was directed to provide documents to a specific adjuster. She further noted that, although the claimant did provide emails showing that these documents were provided, they were provided to a different adjuster. Adjudicator Neilson noted section 64(2)(e) of the SABS allows delivery of documents via electronic means. She noted that several documents had already been sent to the approved adjuster by the claimant electronically. However, the emails allegedly containing the aforementioned employment documents were sent to a different adjuster. Adjudicator Neilson cited section 22(3)(a) of the Electronic Commerce Act, 2000, which determined when an email was considered under the Schedule to be delivered. As the documents were allegedly provided to a different adjuster, rather than the adjuster who was the only one that consent had been provided to release documents to, Adjudicator Neilson ruled that she had made an error of both fact and law to have found that the other adjuster consented to receive these documents or that these documents emailed to her on the claimant’s behalf were delivered by the claimant and received by the insurer. Adjudicator Neilson granted Aviva’s request for reconsideration and rescinded the previous ruling.
Menu